Torah Sparks 5763

PARASHAT BERESHEET October 5, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 1:1-6:8 (Hertz, p. 2; Etz Hayim, p. 3) Triennial Cycle Year II: Genesis 2: - 4:26 (Hertz, p. 6; Etz Hayim, p. 12) Haftarah: I Samuel 20:18 - 42 (Mahar Hodesh) (Hertz, p. 948; Etz Hayim, p. 1215) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (1:1-2:3) The world is created in six days. The first Shabbat. (2:4-25) The creation and, in particular, the creation of humanity. Adam and Eve are placed in the Garden of Eden "to till it and to tend it." (3:1-7) The snake tempts the woman to eat of the forbidden fruit. She persuades the man also to eat it. They become aware of their nakedness, and they make clothing for themselves from fig leaves. (3:8-24) God's first question of human beings: "Where are you?" God punishes the snake by making it crawl on its belly, and by the enmity of human beings; the woman by the pains of childbirth; the man by alienation from the earth. Expulsion from the Garden of Eden. (4:1-15) Cain's murder of Abel and God's response. (4:17-26) The descendants of Cain. The taunting song of Lamech. The birth of Seth, and his son Enosh. (5:1-6:8) The ten generations from Adam to Noah. Torah Text Being Considered "The Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and placed there the man whom He had formed. And from the ground the Lord God caused to grow every tree that was pleasing to the sight and good for food, with the tree of life in the middle of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil... And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, 'Of every tree of the garden you are free to eat; but as for the tree of knowledge of good and evil, you must not eat of it; for as soon as you eat of it, you shall die.'" (Gen 2:8-9, 16-17) Commentaries: A. "The tree of knowledge of good and evil". What was the tree from which Adam and Eve ate? Rabbi Meir said: It was wheat, for when a person lacks knowledge people say, 'That man has never eaten bread of wheat.'

Rabbi Samuel ben Isaac asked Rabbi Zeira: 'Is it possible that it was wheat?' 'Yes,' he replied. 'But surely TREE is written?' he argued. 'It grew lofty like the cedars of Lebanon,' he replied. Rabbi Judah ben Rabbi Ila'i said: It was grapes, for it says, "Their grapes are grapes of gall, they have clusters of bitterness" (Deut. 32:32); those clusters brought bitterness (i.e. sorrow) into the world. Rabbi Abba of Acco said: It was the etrog as it is written, "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise" (Gen. 3:6). Consider: go forth and see, what tree is it whose wood (stem) can be eaten just like its fruit? And you find none but the etrog. Rabbi Yose said: They were figs. This may be compared to a royal prince who sinned with a slave girl, and the king, upon learning of it, expelled him from court. The prince went from door to door of slaves, but they would not receive him; but she who had sinned with him opened her door and received him. So when Adam ate of that tree, God expelled him and cast him out of the Garden of Eden; and Adam appealed to all the trees but they would not receive him. What did they say to him? Said Rabbi Berechiah: 'Behold, a deceiver who deceived his Creator, who deceived his Master!' as it is written, "Let not the foot of presumption come unto me" (Ps. 36:12), which means the foot that presumed against its Creator; "And let not the hand of the wicked shake me" (ibid); i.e. let it not take a leaf from me. But because he had eaten of its fruit, the fig-tree opened its doors and received him, as it is written, ' ...they sewed figleaves together' (Gen. 3:7 Bereisheet Rabbah 15:7) For discussion: Adam and Eve are instructed not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Early Renaissance art portrayed the fruit of this tree as an apple. (Scholars suggest that in Old English an apple was the generic term for a fruit similar to the Hebrew jup, which originally meant fruit.) Not withstanding the mistranslation of Renaissance artists, Midrash Rabbah on Genesis records a dispute on the identity of the mysterious fruit. Four possibilities are suggested: wheat, grapes, etrog, fig. Looking at each of these symbolically or metaphorically, what might the deeper meaning be behind this four-way dispute? Some points to consider: 1. Eating may be considered a metaphor for domination and mastery as in eating matzah, symbolizing mastery of freedom. Furthermore, "good and evil" in the context of the tree is a "merism". A merism is a poetic way of expressing totality by referring to polar opposites. In this case, eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is tantamount to trying to possess knowledge of everything, an act of hubris (hutzpah). Such knowledge surely is reserved only for God. One can engage in inquiry into such knowledge (one can touch the tree) but one should not think that he/she can have complete knowledge as God does.

2. The Midrash asks the question: What fruit symbolizes this arrogance? The wheat or grapes which are a symbol of the advance of civilization (science)? The etrog which is a symbol of asthetics and beauty? The fig which is a symbol of financial power and commerce? 3. What tempts us to such arrogance? What helps us better understand our place in the world? Is this where religion comes in? What role can religion play in the world vis-a-vis science, industry, etc.?

PARASHAT NOAH October 12, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 6:9 - 11:32 (Hertz, p. 26; Etz Hayim, p. 41) Triennial: Year II-5763: Genesis 8:15 - 10:32 (Hertz, p. 31; Etz Hayim, p. 48) Haftarah - Isaiah 54:1 - 55:5 (Hertz, p. 41; Etz Hayim, p. 64 Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (6:9-22) The earth's corruption moves God to tell Noah that He will destroy humankind. God commands Noah to build an ark in which he and his family and the animals and birds will survive the flood. (7:1-9) God orders Noah and his family to enter the ark, with all the animals. (7:10-24) The rains begin, and continue for forty days. All life on earth is blotted out by the waters. (8:1-14) The Flood ends. Noah sends out a raven and then a dove to discover if the earth has dried. The dove returns with an olive leaf in its bill. (8:15-22) Noah leaves the ark and offers sacrifices of thanksgiving to God. (9:1-7) God blesses Noah and his family, permits the eating of meat, and prohibits the shedding of human blood. (9:8-17) God places the rainbow in the sky as the sign of the covenant, the promise that He won't bring another flood upon the world. (9:18-29) Noah's drunkenness and death. (10:1-32) The descendants of Noah's sons: Shem, Ham, and Yaphet. (11:1-9) The story of the Tower of Babel and the dispersion of humankind. (11:10-32) The ten generations from Noah to Abraham. Torah Text Being Considered Every creature that lives shall be yours to eat; as with the green grasses, I give you all these. You must not, however, eat flesh with its life-blood in it. But for your own life-blood I will require a reckoning: I will require it of every beast; of man, too, will I require a reckoning for human life, of every an for that

of his fellow man! Whoever sheds the blood of a man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in His image did God make man (Genesis 9:3-6) Commentaries: A. As explicated in Leviticus 17:11, 14 and Deuteronomy 12:23, blood constituted the life-essence. Consequently, popular thought had it that one could renew or reinforce one's vitality through absorption of blood. For this reason, blood played an important role in the cults of the dead in the ancient world. In the Torah, however, precisely because blood is the symbol of life, it belongs to God alone, as does life itself. (Nachum Sarna, JPS Commentary to Genesis 9:4) B. We have already (Gen. 1:20 and 2:19) recognized nefesh which is related to nefets, the summit, as the highest degree of individualization in the order of succession of the creation. Nefesh is the most independent amongst the created beings. Equally so, we have recognized in dam (from domeh to be like something else, to be assimilated) the prototype of the whole body. The blood is the whole body in liquid state... Through the dam the soul rules the body. It is to this relationship that the Word of God refers with the words b'nafsho damo as long as its blood is held by its soul. The individuality... is the nefesh... The animal body is only allowed to be used for food when the blood is no longer under the control of the soul; the tissues of the animal body can become tissues of the human body for it is something entirely passive, inert, but the animal soul can never become, is never to become, the human soul. According to this, what the Torah says here is: no limb may be eaten if it comes from the animal while it was still under the sway of the animal soul. (Samson Raphael Hirsch on Genesis 9:4) For discussion: Even before there were Jews, the first commandment in the Torah deals with eating. (Ess, ess mein kindt) In the early chapters of Genesis a human being is told not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and evil. Humans are told to be careful about what is eaten because if we are not, we would have to leave Paradise. The fact that God's first commandment deals with food indicates that eating is understood to be much more than watching over our bodies and staying alive. Kashrut, for example, is not about hygiene (the Torah, after all, is not a medical textbook). Kashrut is not a diet for the body. It is a diet for the soul. In our parashah, we are introduced to one of the fundamental laws of kashrut (the prohibition against consuming the blood of an animal) that illustrates this idea. What support do we find for this idea in the two commentaries above? How do these commentators see the prohibition against consuming blood actually affecting our souls? Some points to consider: In Sarna's comment, we see that the prohibition is meant to instill within us the sanctity of life. The context of the prohibition supports this in that we are told not

to take the shedding of blood lightly. There is a difference between eating cereal and eating meat where a soul is involved. Hirsch, however, develops a different idea. He notes that according to Genesis, Chapter 1, the characteristic that distinguishes an animal from all the creatures prior to its creation is the nefesh. The nefesh is that quality that makes an animal an animal. The blood carries the soul, i.e. the instincts of the animal. Therefore, consuming the blood of the animal is tantamount to transferring those instincts to humans which may tip the delicate balance of instincts within us and decrease the dignity of human life. Vegetarianism anyone?

PARASHAT LECH LECHA October 19, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 12:1 - 17:27 (Hertz, p. 45; Etz Hayim, p. 69) Triennial: Year II: Genesis 14:1 - 15:21 (Hertz, p.50; Etz Hayim, p. 77) Haftarah-Isaiah 40:27 - 41:16 (Hertz, p. 60; Etz Hayim, p. 94) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (12:1-9) God speaks to Abram: "Go to the land I will show you." Abram, his wife Sarai, and his nephew Lot travel from Haran to Canaan. Abram sets up altars to God at Shechem, and near Bethel. (12:10-20) Because of famine, Abram goes to Egypt. He lies saying Sarai is his sister. Pharaoh takes her into his house. God brings plagues upon Pharaoh. Pharaoh angrily sends Abram and Sarai away. (13:1-13) Lot's herds men and Abram's herds men quarrel. Abram generously allows Lot first choice of grazing land. Lot chooses the fertile Jordan valley, near Sodom. Abram gets the rest of Canaan. (13:14-18) God renews His promise to grant Abram the land of Canaan. Abram settles near Hebron. (Chap. 14) Five Canaanite kings rebel against Chedarlaomer, King of Elam. A coalition of four eastern kings moves to punish the rebels. In the battles between the two groups of king Lot is captured. Abram arms his followers and pursues Lot's captors in order to rescue his nephew. He defeats them and saves Lot and the other captives. (Chap. 15) God makes a covenant with Abram renewing His promise of progeny and the land of Canaan. God tells Abram that his descendants will be exiled, redeemed and returned to the Land. The Land's boundaries and its inhabitants. (Chap. 16) Abram's concubine, Hagar, becomes pregnant, leading to conflict with Sarai. Sarai mistreats Hagar, who runs away, but she returns after an angel of the Lord promises her that the son within her womb will become the founder of a great nation. The son is born, and is named Ishmael, considered to be the ancestor of the Arab peoples. (Chap. 17) God establishes circumcision as the sign of the covenant. At this time Abram and Sarai are renamed Abraham and Sarah. God also predicts that

Abraham and Sarah will bear a son, to be named Isaac. The Sedrah concludes with the circumcision of Abraham, Ishmael, and all the men of the household. Torah Text Being Considered Some time later, the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision. He said, 'Fear not, Abram, I am a shield to you; Your reward shall be very great.' But Abraham said, 'O Lord God, what can You give me, seeing that I shall die childless and the one in charge of my household is Dammesek Eliezer!' Abraham said further, 'Since You have granted me no offspring, my steward will be my heir.' The word of the Lord came to him in reply, 'That one shall not be your heir, none but your very own issue shall be your heir.' He took him outside and said, 'Look toward heaven and count the starts, if you are able to count them.' And He added, 'So shall your offspring be.' And because he put his trust in the Lord, HE RECKONED IT TO HIS MERIT. (Genesis 15:1-6) Commentaries: A. The Holy Blessed One accounted it to Abraham for righteousness and merit because of the faith with which he had trusted in Him. (Rashi) B. But I do not understand the nature of this merit. Why should he not believe in the God of truth, and he himself is the prophet, and "God is not a man that He should lie?" (Numbers 23:29). Furthermore, he who believed and on the basis of this belief was ready to sacrifice his only son, the beloved one, and withstood the rest of the trials, how could he not believe a good tiding? The correct interpretation appears to me to be that the verse is stating that Abraham believed in God and he considered it due to the righteousness of the Holy Blessed One that He would give him a child under all circumstances and not because of Abraham's state of righteousness and his reward, even though He told him, "Your reward will be very great" (Gen. 15:1) For discussion: The second clause of verse 6 contains a syntactical ambiguity. What is the subject of AND HE RECKONED IT?i Whose merit is referred to in RECKONED IT TO HIS MERIT? Ramban cannot accept Rashi's reading. Ramban cannot understand why the Torah would praise and reward Abraham's faith. Rather, the verse draws attention to Abraham's humility (I don't deserve this kindness from God). Can you defend Rashi's reading? In other words, Ramban does not consider Abraham believing in God to be such a big deal. How would you rebut Ramban's argument? Or to ask the question differently, usually the Torah rewards actions, not faith. What is so striking about Abraham's faith that God should reward it? Some points to consider: Belief in God is not simply a matter of saying that God exists. It is a matter of trusting in God even when reality seems to challenge that belief. Rabbi Harold

Kushner in his commentary to the recently published "Etz Hayim" (Chumash) writes that Abraham gave God the benefit of the doubt, believing not only in God's existence but in God's reliability, even when circumstances might have led him to think otherwise. The only thing we can do for God, the only thing for which God depends on us, is to hold on to our faith even when things do not go our way. This is Abraham's (and our) tzedakah (favor) to God. Professor Jacob Neusner in his book "The Bible and Us" (p. 88) makes a similar point. He writes "And Abraham and Sarah matter because, doubting and troubled, they nonetheless believe. Never fully persuaded, testing God and being tested by him, Abraham muddles through to believe in a heart filled with doubt, to overcome anxiety, to affirm and not deny, even when nothing out there gives you reason to believe" that is an act of courage. It is the hardest thing that most of us ever have to do: to believe, to affirm, to say "yes" always, yes to ourselves and those we love and who love us and to God though at times we are challenged in our belief and trust. That is why belief marks merit, because it runs against the everyday, not because the here and now confirm that faith. No wonder Christianity, Islam, and Judaism reach back to Abraham. We may be filled with doubt, occupied with purely personal concerns, and yet we are able to affirm and serve when God calls. Care to share some of your doubts now and hear what others may have to say about them?

PARASHAT VAYERA October 26, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 18:1 - 22:24 (Hertz, p. 63; Etz Hayim, p. 99) Triennial- Year II: Genesis 19:1 - 20:18 (Hertz, p. 66; Etz Hayim, p. 104) Haftarah - II Kings 4:1 - 37 (Hertz, p. 76; Etz Hayim, p. 123) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (18:1-15) Abraham welcomes three wayfarers with full hospitality, not realizing that they are angels. They tell Abraham that Sarah will have a son. Sarah, overhearing, laughs in disbelief. (18:16-33) God tells Abraham of his decision to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham tries to dissuade God, with the famous words," Shall not the judge of all the earth deal justly?" Abraham bargains with God, who promises not to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah if even ten righteous men can be found there. (19:1-19) The angels warn Lot to flee Sodom with his family. His wife disobeys the order not to look back, and is turned into a pillar of salt. (19:30-38) After the destruction, Lot's daughters, believing there is no one else left on earth, trick him into an incestuous union. They each bear sons, the founders of the nations of Ammon and Moab. (20:1-18) Abraham and Sarah are in Gerar. Abraham says that Sarah is his sister, so Abimelekh king of Gerar has Sarah brought to him. In a dream, God appears to him and frightens him away from Sarah. Abimelekh rebukes Abraham, but then compensates him for his trouble. (21:1-8) God keeps His promise; Isaac is born. Isaac is circumcised on the eighth day of his life, and there is a banquet on the day of his weaning. (21:9-21) Sarah fears the negative influence Ishmael may have over Isaac. Hagar and Ishmael are sent away. God promises Hagar, "I will make a great nation" of Ishmael. (21:22-34) Abraham and Abimelekh make a covenant of peace at Be'er-sheva. (22:1-19) The Akedah, the story of the binding of Isaac. (22:20-24) Genealogy which includes Rebekah, future wife of Isaac.

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

Some points to consider: When in life do you think it is not good to look back? What about the modern American credo - "get over it" or "get past it"? Are there any applications to events that have happened to us in recent times?

PARASHAT HAYYEI SARAH November 2, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 23:1 - 25:18 (Hertz, p. 80; Etz Hayim, p. 127) Triennial - Year II: Genesis - 24:10 - 24:52 (Hertz, p. 83; Etz Hayim, p. 132) Haftarah - I Kings 1:1-31 (Hertz, p. 90; Etz Hayim, p. 142) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (23:1-20) Sarah dies at the age of 127. Abraham, after bargaining with Ephron, acquires the Cave of Machpelah, in Hebron, as a family burial plot. This is the first Jewish acquisition of property in the Land of Israel. (24:1-9) Abraham sends his servant back to Aram-Naharaim ("Aram - of the two rivers" = Mesopotamia) to find a wife for Isaac. (24:10-28) Eliezer, Abraham's servant, has been sent to Haran to find a wife for Isaac. He arrives in Haran, and finds Rebecca at a well, where she passes his "test" of compassion and diligence. (24:29-49) Eliezer tells his journey's purpose and recounts his experiences to Laban, Rebecca's brother, and how God led him to find Rebecca for Isaac. (24:50-52) Laban and Bethuel agree to allow Rebecca to go with Eliezer. (24:53-67) Rebecca consents to go with Eliezer, and is given a farewell blessing by her family. Rebecca goes to Canaan and is wed to Isaac. (25:1-6) The genealogy of Abraham's descendants from his second marriage to Keturah. (25:7-11) Abraham dies and is buried next to Sarah in the Cave of Machpelah. (25:12-18) A genealogy of Ishmael's descendants. Torah Text Being Considered "Abraham was now old, advanced in years. And Abraham said to the senior servant of his household... 'you will not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites among whom I dwell, but will go to the land of my birth and get a wife for my son Isaac...'

Then the servant took ten of his master's camels and set out, taking with him all the bounty of his master; and he made his way to Aram-naharaim, to the city of Nahor." (Gen. 24:1-4, 10) Commentaries: A. "...of his master's camels" (Gen. 24:10) They were distinct from other camels, for they would go out muzzled because of concern over committing theft - so that they should not graze in the fields belonging to others. (Rashi) B. And there was quarreling between the herds men of Abram's livestock and the herds men of Lot's livestock (Gen. 13:7) Because Lot's shepherds were wicked and would graze their cattle in the fields of others and Abrahm's shepherds would rebuke them over the theft they committed by grazing their cattle on other people's land. And Lot's shepherds would say, "The land has been given to Abrahm, and he has no heir, so Lot, his brother's son, will inherit him, i.e. will inherit his estate, and this is not theft, for the land will ultimately belong to Lot. (Rashi) C. "Now sharpen, if you please, your gear, your sword and your bow and go to the field and catch game for me. Then make delicacies for me" (Gen. 27:3-4) --- "And catch game for me from that which is owner less and not from what which is stolen." (Rashi) D. Moses was grazing the sheep of Jethro, his father-in-law, the priest of Midian; he guided the sheep far into the wilderness (Ex. 3:1) He went into the wilderness in order to distance himself from theft so that the flocks would not graze in the fields of others. (Rashi) For discussion: Rashi seems to be making the same point repeatedly in his commentary, i.e. in four different instances. One may presume that if he made his point based on only one instance, it would seem that he was "stretching" his interpretation in order to make the point. Well, maybe that is the beauty of "drash" or sermonica. You can take a verse and suggest that it implies some further meaning beyond the literal meaning. The new "Etz Hayim" Chumash does this. It offers literal understanding (Potok) and "drashic" commentary (Kushner). Do we sometimes use a similar approach when reading some types of literature - other than the Bible? Some points to consider: This whole super-sensitivity to theft in Rashi's commentaries - what do you think? Is he perhaps, being overly zealous? Unrealistic? Yet, let us ask - how would the corporate, interpersonal, or political world look different today if we attended to such minor details as pointed out by Rashi in his comments above?

PARASHAT TOLEDOT November 9, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 25:19 - 28:9 (Hertz, p. 93; Etz Hayim, p. 146) Triennial - Year II: Genesis 26:23 - 27:27 (Hertz, p. 96; Etz Hayim, p. 152) Haftarah - Malakhi 1:1 - 2:7 (Hertz, p. 102; Etz Hayim, p. 162) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (25:19-26) Isaac marries Rebecca. During her pregnancy, she feels a struggle within her. She gives birth to twins, Esau and Jacob. (25:27-34) Esau sells his birthright to Jacob for a pot of stew. (26:1-11) Isaac and Rebecca, fleeing famine, go to Gerar to live with the Philistines. God appears to Isaac and renews the covenant with him. Fearful of the Philistines, Isaac lies and says Rebecca is his sister. Abimelech finds out the truth and warns the people to leave Isaac and Rebecca alone. (26:12-16) Isaac prospers, inciting the jealousy of the Philistines, who block the wells he dug. Ultimately, Abimelech asks him to leave. (26:17-22) Isaac moves to the valley of Gerar, where there are further quarrels with the Philistines over wells. He finds a peaceful place to settle and names it Rechovot. (26:23-33) Abimelech makes a peace treaty with Isaac, seeing Isaac's prosperity as a sign of God's blessing. (26:34-35) Esau marries two Hittite women, to his parents' distress. (27:1-27) Isaac, his sight now dim, announces his intention to bless Esau, but Rebecca and Jacob conspire to trick him into blessing Jacob instead. (27:28-45) Isaac blesses Jacob. Esau returns home and Jacob's deception is discovered. Esau weeps and pleads for a blessing from Isaac, who complies. Enraged, Esau plots to kill Jacob when Isaac dies. Rebecca hears of this and advises Jacob to flee to her brother Laban in the land of Haran. (27:46-28:5) Isaac blesses Jacob and sends him to Haran. (28:6-9) Esau realizes that his Canaanite wives displease Isaac, so he takes a daughter of Ishmael for a wife.

Torah Text Being Considered "Rebecca then took her older son Esau's clean/best garments which were with her in the house and clothed Jacob her younger son." (Genesis 27:15) Commentaries: A. Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel said: "All my days I attended upon my father but I did not attain to one hundredth of the attention Esau gave his father, for I attended him in soiled garments and when I went out to the marketplace I went with clean clothes. When Esau, however, attended his father, he waited upon him in regal garments, saying, 'Father's honor is to be respected only in regal garments." (Bereisheet Rabbah 65:16) B. Rav Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel: They asked Rabbi Eliezer: "What is the limit for honoring one's parents?" He said to them: "Go see what a certain idol worshiper in Ashkelon named Dama son of Netina did. Once the Sages sought to buy gems for the ephod from him at 60,000 profit - Rav Kahana taught 80,000 - but the key (to the gems storage place) was under his father's head and he would not disturb him. The next year, the Holy One rewarded him - a red heifer was born to his herd. When the Sages came to him, he said to them: "I know that if I were to ask for all the money in the world, you would give it to me, but I am asking only for the money I lost by honoring my father." Rabbi Chanina said: "If someone who is not commanded and acts is considered praiseworthy, how much more so one who is commanded and acts!" So said Rabbi Chanina: "One who is commanded and acts is more praiseworthy than one who is not commanded and acts." (Talmud Kiddushin 31a) For discussion: Esau is typically portrayed in negative terms in our tradition with one exception. He is a paradigm of kibbud av v'eim - respecting one's parents. It is interesting to note that In discussing the extent to which someone should honor one's parents, the Talmud uses the example of Dama the son of Netina who, the Talmud later describes, as a general in the Roman army! But that is not really so strange. Consider that Esau is the progenitor of the Romans (Edom). The name Dama is similar in etymology to "dam" which means blood, something that brings to mind the redness of Esau's physical description. Esau is also called Edom - "Red One" based on his exclamation when he returns from hunting and says: "Give me some of that red, red stuff (soup)." The red heifer seems to echo this theme too. Yet, while Esau and his descendant Dama are extolled for their respect for their father, the Talmud still says: "The one who is commanded to act (Jewish person) and acts is greater than the one who is not commanded and acts (Esau and Dama the Roman). That seems counterintuitive. How do we make sense of the Talmud's dictum?

Some points to consider: The one who acts out of a sense of being commanded may be more consistent and reliable in his conduct. As opposed to the one who acts when he/she feels like it, the person who feels an obligation is more likely to do the deed even when he/she does not feel like doing so. But perhaps, there is even a better explanation. Acting out of a sense of commandment gives us the opportunity to enter into even a hi gher spiritual relationship. In performing a commandment, we experience God. If we perform a deed on our own, we may feel good about it; the other person may feel good about it. But if it is God's commandment that is being carried out, we experience an additional good feeling- a feeling of joy - as we carry out His will purposively.

PARASHAT VAYETZE November 16, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 28:10 - 32:3 (Hertz, p. 106; Etz Hayim, p. 166) Triennial Year II: Genesis 30:14 - 31:16 (Hertz, p. 111; Etz Hayim, p. 176) Haftarah - Hosea 12:13 -14:10 (Hertz, p. 118; Etz Hayim, p. 188) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (28:10-22) Jacob sets out for Haran, fleeing Esau. He stops for the night, and dreams of a ladder between heaven and earth, with angels ascending and descending. God renews for him the covenant promise given to Abraham and Isaac. Jacob names the place Beth El - "House of God." (29:1-30) Jacob arrives in Mesopotamia. He meets Rachel, his cousin, and Laban, her father. Jacob agrees to work for Laban for seven years in exchange for marrying Rachel, but Laban tricks him into marrying Leah, Rachel's older sister. Jacob is forced to work another seven years for Rachel. (29:31-35) Leah gives birth to four sons - Reuben, Simon, Levi and Judah - but Rachel is barren. (30:1-13) Rachel, jealous of Leah, gives Jacob her maid Bilhah, who bears him two sons, Dan and Naphtali. Rachel adopts the sons as her own. Leah, apparently no longer able to bear children, does similarly with her maid Zilpah, who also bears two sons, Gad and Asher. (30:14-21) Leah and Rachel quarrel over some mandrake roots, believed to cure barrenness. Leah has two more sons, Issachar and Zebulun. (30:22-24) Rachel finally has a son, Joseph. (30:24-43) Jacob wants to return home to Canaan, but his father-in-law Laban dissuades him. Jacob stays and succeeds in greatly enriching himself. (31:1-16) Jacob realizes that his increasing wealth is causing animosity among Laban's sons and decides to return to Canaan. (31:17-21) Without telling Laban, Jacob gathers his herds and flocks and leaves. Rachel takes Laban's teraphim - household idols. (31:22-32:3) God warns Laban not to harm Jacob. Laban pursues and overtakes Jacob. In an impassioned speech, Jacob rebukes Laban for his

devious ways. Laban and Jacob make a covenant of peace. Torah Text Being Considered Now he heard the things that Laban's sons were saying: "Jacob has taken all that was our father's and from that which was our father's he has built up all this wealth." Jacob saw Laban's face and behold it was not as it had been in the past. (Genesis 31:1-2) Commentaries: A. From this verse we see the importance of being able to notice the emotional state of another person from the expressions on his face. Lavan did not say any unkind words to Yaakov. Nothing verbal was communicated that would imply that Lavan felt resentment or animosity towards Yaakov. Nevertheless, Yaakov was sensitized to the look on Lavan's face. From here we can also see how careful we must be with our own facial expressions... in causing pain to others (Zelig Pliskin in Growth Through Torah on Gen. 31:2) B. Shammai says: "Make your Torah study a fixed duty, say little and do much, and greet all people with a cheerful countenance." (Avot 1:15) C. The strong desire towards helping others, laudable though it is, may eventuate into a personality so intent on giving that it ignores the recipient. Though it is prudent to "say little and do much" (above) it is absurd to extend this principle to one's approach when helping someone. To be abrupt when giving... is to depersonalize the process of sharing. Therefore, "greet all people with a pleasant countenance". You are helping people who are deeply sensitive and need the warmth of your sincere countenance as much as they may need your help. Always be aware and attentive to the people you relate with, and ensure that sharing itself is not dehumanized. (Reuven Bulka on Avot 1:15) For discussion: It is understandable that one should mind their own facial expressions, but is it realistic to counsel that we "greet all people with a cheerful countenance"? Isn't that being a bit too saccharine? Do you happen to have some kind of "trick mechanism" that helps make you look like you have sort of a pleasant smile on your face always, ie. "a cheerful countenance"? Want to tell us how?

PARASHAT VAYISHLAH November 23, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 32: 4 - 36:43 (Hertz, p. 122; Etz Hayim, p. 198) Triennial Year II: Genesis 34:1 - 35:15 (Hertz, p. 127; Etz Hayim, p. 206) Haftarah - Obadiah 1:1 - 21 (Hertz, p. 137; Etz Hayim, p. 221) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (32:4-24) Jacob nervously prepares for his meeting with his brother Esau. (32:25-33) Jacob wrestles with a "man," and receives from him a blessing and a new name, Israel, at the cost of a lame thigh. (33:1-15) Jacob meets his brother Esau, who receives him warmly. They go their separate ways in peace. (33:16-20) Esau returns to the land of Edom and Jacob arrives at Shechem. (34) The rape of Dinah and her brothers' revenge. (35:1-15) Jacob builds an altar at Bethel, fulfilling his vow from many years before; God renews His promise of the land to him. (35:16-20) Rachel dies giving birth to Benjamin and is buried on the road to Bethlehem. (35:21-26) Reuben's sin; a review of the sons of Jacob. (35:27-29) Isaac dies and is buried in the Cave of Machpelah. (36:1-43) A genealogy of Esau's descendants. Torah Text Being Considered "Now Dinah, the daughter whom Leah had borne to Jacob, went out to visit the daughters of the land. Shechem son of Hamor the Hivite, chief of the country, saw her, and took her and lay with her by force. On the third day, when they were in pain (from circumcision), Simeon and Levi, two of Jacob's sons, brothers of Dinah, took each his sword, came upon the city unmolested, and slew all the males. Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, "You have brought trouble on me, making me odious among the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizzites; my men are few in number, so that if they

unite against me and attack me, I and my house will be destroyed." But they answered, "Should our sister be treated like a whore?" (Gen. 34:1,2, 25, 30-31) Commentaries: A. "Simeon and Levi are brothers, weapons of violence are their stock-intrade. Into their company let me not come, in their assembly let me not rejoice. For in their anger, they killed a man; and when in a good mood, they maimed an ox! Cursed be their anger, so fierce, and their wrath how unyielding! I will divide them up in Jacob and scatter them in Israel." (Gen. 49:5-7) B. Each of the two brothers had a separate motive for this "fire" (anger): one came with the human emotion of avenging the family honor - such a "fire" is to be considered a "foreign fire" (esh zarah), i.e. an unacceptable (alien-type) motive. The other came with zealousness for God and without any personal considerations, and this "fire" is the fire of the Lord (shalhevetya). Nevertheless, even with such a fire one must take extreme care to direct its placement and timing, otherwise it can do incalculable damage. (Netziv in Ha'amek Davar) C. The "sons of Noah' (Gentiles) are commanded to observe certain commandments. Thus, they are required to appoint judges in each and every district to give judgment. And the Noachide who transgresses one of the laws is subject to the death penalty by the sword. If he sees a person transgressing one of these seven Noachide laws and does not bring him to trial for a capital crime, he who saw him is subject to the same death penalty. It was on account of this that the people of the city of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty because Shechem (the person) committed an act of violence and they saw and knew of it, but they did not bring him to trial. (Rambam, Mishnah Torah, Book of Judges 9:14) D. The Torah gives the reason why Simeon and Levi spoke with guile (b'mirmah) to the inhabitants of Shechem; it was because they gave themselves a "halachic hetter" or permission. Rashi calls their guile "wisdom" and then says that in fact there actually was no guile as such because of their right to protect the honor of the sons of Jacob. (Shabbtai ben Yomtov in Hamikra Kifshuto) For discussion: 1. How do you interpret this story about the violence done in the city of Shechem and Jacob's reaction to it? Would you consider Simeon and Levi heroes or hotheads for protecting their sister's honor? 2. While Maimonides argues that Simeon and Levi were justified in slaying the Shechemite men because they witnessed the abduction, knew about it and did not bring the Prince of Shechem to justice, Nachmanides disagrees and maintains that only the prince was guilty and Jacob's anger was appropriately directed against his sons who murdered the men of Shechem. 3. Shabbtai ben Yomtov and the Netziv imply that one cannot explain away the massacred with the simplistic claim that Simeon and Levi were

barbarians. Just the opposite is the case. They were religious, intelligent, and knowledgeable in the Torah. The lesson is that even such people are liable, by virtue of twisted legalistic reasoning, to sink to a level where they are capable of doing evil without sensing that they committed a crime. "Pseudo-halachic" reasoning is also criticized by the Talmud which reports that actually in the Temple a murder took place because of it. "It once happened that two priests (kohanim) were both running up the ramp of the altar to offer sacrifices, when one of them came within four cubits of the other. So he took a dagger and plunged it into the heart of the other kohen. This informs you that the laws of defilement of garments seem to be more important to some individuals than the spilling of blood!" (Talmud: Yoma)

PARASHAT VAYYESHEV (HANUKKAH) November 30, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 37:1 - 40:23 (Hertz, p. 141; Etz Hayim, p. 226) Triennial Year II: Genesis 38:1 - 38:30 (Hertz, p. 145; Etz Hayim, p. 233) Maftir: Numbers 7:1 - 7:17 (Hanukkah- 1st Day) (Hertz, p. 596; Etz Hayim, p. 805) Haftarah - Zechariah 2:14 - 4:7 (Hertz, p. 987; Etz Hayim, p. 1269 Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (37:1-11) The Joseph story begins. Jacob favored Joseph and gave him a "coat of many colors." Joseph's dreams indicate that his brothers will serve him some day. Not surprisingly, Joseph's brothers hate and envy him. (37:12-36) Joseph's brothers plot to kill him. Then, at Reuben's urging, they change their plan to sell him into slavery. Joseph is taken to Egypt. Jacob's sons deceive him into believing that a wild animal killed Joseph. (38:1-30) Events in Judah's life after the selling of Joseph, particularly the story of Tamar. (39:1-6) Joseph's experiences in Egypt at Potiphar's house. (39:7-19) Potiphar's wife tries to seduce Joseph. He refuses, so she falsely accuses him of trying to rape her. (39:20-23) Joseph is imprisoned, but once again rises to a position of authority. (40:1-23) Pharaoh's cupbearer and baker are imprisoned. Each has a dream which Joseph interprets. Joseph's interpretations come true, but the cupbearer who is saved forgets his promise to help Joseph. Torah Text Being Considered "A long time afterward, Shua's daughter, the wife of Judah, died. When his period of mourning was over, Judah went up to Timnah to his sheep shearers, together with his friend Hirah the Adullamite. When Judah saw her (Tamar on the road to Timnah), he took her for a harlot; for she had covered her face. So he turned aside to her by the road and said, "Here, let me sleep with you" for he did not know that she was his daughter-inlaw.

About three months later, Judah was told, your daughter-in-law Tamar has played the harlot; in fact, she is with child by harlotry. "Bring her out" said Judah, "and let her be burned." As she was being brought out, she sent this message to her father-in-law, "I am with child by the man to whom these belong." And she added, "Examine these: whose seal and cord and staff are these?" Judah recognized them, and said, "She is more in the right than I, inasmuch as I did not give her to my son Shelah." And he was not intimate with her again." (Genesis 38:12,15,24-26) Commentaries: A. Because he dealt justly with Tamar, Judah's offspring became the hereditary rulers of Israel, (the king being a judge too). When the case of Tamar came before Judah, he acquitted her, finding a plea on her behalf. What happened there? Isaac and Jacob and his brothers sat there trying to protect him, but Judah recognized the place where the mideed was done. Isaac and Jacob, trying to defend him, pleaded that though the signet and the cord were Judah's, he might have lost them. Judah, however, definitely recognized the place, the general circumstances and admitted his share in what had happened and said, "The thing is correct; she is more righteous than I." (Shemot Rabbah 30:19) B. Joseph who sanctified the heavenly Name in private (when he resisted Poptiphar's wife) merited that one letter should be added to his name from the Name of the Holy Blessed One, as it is written, He appointed it in Joseph for a testimony (Psalms 81:6) where his name is spelled Yehosef with the letter "hey"). Judah, however, who sanctified the heavenly Name in public merited that the whole of his name should be called after the Name of the Holy Blessed One. The four letters of the Tetragammaton occur in Judah's name - Yehudah. (Talmud: Sota 10b) For discussion: Commenting on the source in the talmudic tractate, Sota, Aviva Zornberg points out in her book "The Beginnings of Desire", "There are two different kinds of heroism. Joseph emphatically rejects his master's wife, so that if she had not revealed the affair nothing need ever have been known of it; for this he is rewarded with one letter of God's Name. Judah, however, sins, both in withholding his youngest son from Tamar and in sleeping with her, and when the results of his act have become visible, a public fact, he justifies her behavior and publicly confesses. This transformation of Judah's character explains his newly found willingness to step in to rescue his younger brother from Egyptian captivity. The Book of Genesis begins with characters that do not take responsibility for their actions. Adam blames Eve; Cain asks "Am I my brother's keeper?" (Gen. 4:9).

As we approach the end of Genesis, we see positive development - a biblical character owning up publicly to his misdeeds. King David, royal descendant of Judah, follows Judah's lead later on. When confronted by Nathan the Prophet for committing adultery, King David admits his transgression and says "I stand guilty before the Lord" (II Samuel 12:13). Sometimes one wonders why prominent people in public life who are accused of serious sexual indiscretion or some other major malfeasance tend often to deny wrongdoing at first. It almost seems inevitable that the public glare and further investigation will reveal the truth. Then why is there a tendency to deny the accusation? (Think Nixon, Clinton, clergy, etc.)

PARASHAT MIKETZ (HANUKKAH) December 7, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 41:1 - 44:17 (Hertz, p. 155; Etz Hayim, p. 250) Triennial Year II: Genesis 41:53 - 43:15 (Hertz, p. 158; Etz Hayim, p. 257) Maftir: Numbers 7:54 - 8:4 (Hanukkah - 8th Day) (Hertz, p. 599; Etz Hayim, p. 809) Haftarah- I Kings 7:40 - 50 (Hertz, p. 990; Etz Hayim, p. 1273) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (41:1-44) Pharaoh dreams of seven lean cows devouring seven fat cows, and seven thin sheaves consuming seven healthy sheaves. When none of his advisors can give him a satisfactory explanation, the cupbearer remembers Joseph, who is brought to Pharaoh and interprets the dream to mean that there will be seven prosperous years followed by seven years of famine. He suggests that Pharaoh appoint someone to supervise storaging to prepare for the famine. Pharaoh chooses Joseph. (41:45-52) Joseph's wife bears him two sons, Ephraim and Menasseh. (41:53-57) The seven years of plenty pass and the famine begins. (42:1-6) Ten of Joseph's brothers come to Egypt to get food. Their brother Simon is left behind as a pledge that they will return. (42:7-28) Joseph recognizes his brothers, but they don't recognize him. He sets up a deception in order to engineer Benjamin's being brought to Egypt, accusing them of being spies. The only way they can clear their names is by bringing their other brother to Egypt. (42:29-38) The brothers tell Jacob what happened to them. He refuses to send his youngest and most beloved son Benjamin. (43:1-15) After the food runs out, Jacob is forced to agree to allow Benjamin to go down to Egypt with the other brothers. (43:16-34) This time Joseph receives the brothers with great honor, and arranges a feast for them. (44:1-17) Joseph tests the brothers again with the accusation that Benjamin has stolen his silver goblet. Torah Text Being Considered

"The seven years of abundance that the land of Egypt enjoyed came to an end, and the seven years of famine set in, just as Joseph had foretold. There was famine in all lands, but throught the land of Egypt there was bread. And when all the land of Egypt felt the hunger, the people cried out to Pharaoh for bread; and Pharaoh said to all the Egyptians, "Go to Joseph; whatever he tells you, you shall do." Accordingly, when the famine became severe in the land of Egypt, Joseph laid open all that was within, and rationed out grain to the Egyptians. The famine, however, spread over the whole world. So all the world came to Joseph in Egypt to procure rations, for the famine had become severe throughout the world." (Gen. 41:53-57) Commentaries: A. Rabbi Levi Yitzhak turned to those standing around him and said, 'Do you know the difference between our father Abraham, peace be with him, and Lot? Why does such a spirit of satisfaction pervade the story of how Abraham set before the angels curd and milk and tender calf? Did not Lot also bake for them and give them to eat? And why is the fact that Abraham received them in his tent regarded as so deserving an action? For Lot also asked them in and gave them shelter. Now this is the truth of the matter: In the case of Lot it is written that angels came to Sodom. But concerning Abraham, the Scriptures say, "And he lifted up his eyes and looked and lo, three men stood over against him." Lot saw heavenly angels while Abraham saw poor, dusty wayfarers in need of food and rest." Rabbi Eleazar said: Come let us be grateful to the rogues for were it not for them we (who do not always respond to every appeal for charity) would have been sinning every day. (Ketubot 68a) B. Rabbi Chayim of Sanz had this to say about fraudulent charity collectors: "The merit of charity is so great that I am happy to give to 100 beggars even if only one might actually be needy. Some people, however, sat as if they are exempt from giving charity to 100 beggars in the event that one might be a fraud. (Darkai Chayim, 1962, p. 13) C. Rabbi Shmelke of Nicholsburg said, "When a poor man asks for aid, do not use his faults as an excuse for not helping him. For then God will look for your offenses, and He is sure to find many of them. Keep in mind that the poor man's transgressions have been atoned for by his poverty while yours still remain with you. (Fun Unzer Alter Otzer, II, p.99) D. In answer to an inquiry from a community, overburdened with beggars Solomon b. Adret ruled that although, the poor are everywhere supported from the communal chest, if they wish in addition to beg from door to door they may do so, and each should give according to his understanding and desire. (Responsa, pt. 3, #380) E. If one noticed a poor man asking for something and ignored him, and failed to give tzedakah, he has broken a prohibitive command, as it is written: Do not harden your heart and shut your hand against your needy brother (Deut. 1:7). (Rambam, Mishneh Torah - Gifts to the Poor 7:2) F. Poor Gentiles should be supported along with poor Jews; the Gentile sick should be visited along with the Jewish sick; and their dead should be buried along with the Jewish dead, in order to further peaceful relating. (Gittin 61a)

G. If the poor man stretches out his hand and he has nothing to give him, he should not scold and raise his voice to him, but he should speak gently to him and show him his goodness of heart; namely that he wishes to give him something but cannot. (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Ediah, 249:3-5) H. Rabbi Chana bar Chanilai would leave his hand in his pocket so that (by the immediacy and naturalness of handing him money) a poor person who came to ask would not feelhumiliated. (Talmud, Brachot 58b) I. Rabbi Eliezar stated, "The reward of charity depends entirely upon the extent of kindness in it." (Talmud, Sukkah 49b) For discussion: We all meet an occasional pan handler on the street. In our society today there are governmental and social agencies which handle such matters. So why should we give that person anything? Or maybe we should give anyway? What do you usually do and why?

PARASHAT VAYIGASH December 14, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 44:18 - 47:27 (Hertz, p. 169; Etz Hayim, p. 274) Triennial Year II: 45:28 - 46:27 (Hertz, p. 172; Etz Hayim, p. 279) Haftarah- Ezekiel 37:15 - 28 (Hertz, p. 178; Etz Hayim, p. 290) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (44:18-34) Judah passionately pleads with Joseph to spare Benjamin for the sake of their aged father, offering himself in Benjamin's place. (45:1-27) Joseph reveals his identity to his brothers. He calms their fears, and sends them home to tell Jacob the good news and to bring him to Egypt. (45:28-46:27) Jacob agrees to go down to Egypt to see Joseph. On the way, God speaks to Jacob in a vision, saying that He will accompany Jacob to Egypt. A list of the 70 people who went down to Egypt is given. (46:28-30) Joseph and Jacob have a tearful reunion. (46:30-47:10) Joseph appeals to Pharaoh to allow his family to settle in the region of Goshen. Pharaoh agrees. Jacob is presented to Pharaoh. (47:11-27) Joseph's policies of distribution and rationing of food during the famine result in an increase in the wealth and power of the central government. Torah Text Being Considered "So Israel set out with all that was his, and he came to Beersheba, where he offered sacrifices to the God of his father Isaac. God called to Israel in a vision by night: Jacob! Jacob! He answered, here. And He said, I am God, the God of your father. Fear not to go down to Egypt, for I will make you there into a great nation. I Myself will go down with you to Egypt, and I Myself will also bring you back; and Josephis hand will close your eyes." (Gen. 46:1-4) Commentaries: A. "Fear not!" The same reassurance was given to Abraham and to Isaac; it will be given to Moses as well. It is never preceded by a statement revealing their disquiet. The idea is that man's inner anxieties and fears, although unexpressed, are known to God. (Sarna in JPS Commentary on Gen. 46:3)

B. Our Sages said: "And I shall glorify him" (Ex. 15:2). I shall accompany Him until I come with Him to His temple. This may be compared to a king whose son left him for foreign parts. Wherever his son went the king went too. So it was with Israel. When they went down into Egypt, the Divine presence accompanied them, as it is stated: "I will go down with thee into Egypt." When they left, the Divine presence accompanied them, as it is stated: "And I will surely bring thee up again." They went forth into the sea, the Divine presence accompanied them, as it is stated: "And the angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, accompanied them from behind." They went forth into the wilderness, the Divine presence accompanied them, as it is said: "And the Lord went before them in a pillar of cloud by day to show them the way." (Mechilta) C. Said the Holy Blessed One to Moses: I said to their father Jacob: "I will go down with thee into Egypt; and I will surely ring thee up again." Now I have come down here to bring out his descendants, in accordance with My promise to their forefather, Jacob. Where will I take them to? To the place from whence they came forth, to the land that I swore to their fathers, as it is written: "To bring them up out of that land" (Ex. 3:8) (Shemot Rabbah) D. "We find that it was only in the case of Jacob, and not of Abraham and Isaac, that God appeared in "visions of the night". This was because he was prepared to go and live outside the Holy Land. The Divine revelation came to him, at night, to show him that the Divine resets on Israel even in the nights, in the darkness of exile, as they stated: Wherever Israel was exiled, the Divine presence accompanied them. They were exile to Egypt, the Divine presence accompanied them to Babylon, the Divine Presence accompanied them. Regarding this, Psalm 20 observes: "The Lord answer thee in the day of trouble, the name of the God of Jacob set thee up on high." While they are in trouble and in the darkness of the night, the God of Jacob who was revealed to him at night, will set thee up on high. (Meshech Chochma) E. "This contains a wonderful promise for the very existence of the nation in Egypt, and the meaning of "your eyes"i is Jacobis desire and the special attribute that Jacob provides for this. It is interpreted in the portion of Vezot Haberachah (Deut. 33:28), Thus Israel dwells in safety (betach), alone (badad) is Jacob is abode ("ein," literally eye),in which eein Yaakovi means to dwell in safety, alone, with "betach" meaning to be at peace and with the attribute of love between man and his fellow, and "badad" means not to intermingle more than is necessary with the nonJewish nations. "As regards "badad" Joseph endeavored with all his might that Israel not assimilate among the Egyptians. (Haiamek Davar) For discussion: Jacob learns that Joseph is still alive and says, "It is enough; Joseph my son is yet alive; I will go down and see him before I die" (Gen. 45:28). In the next chapter, we read about Jacob's departure and arrival at Beersheba where he offers a sacrifice to God. God appears to him in a vision and tells him "fearnot to God down to Egypt." Yet, the text does not state that Jacob was afraid. What might have been the nature of his fear? Can we identify with those fears?

PARASHAT VAYEHI December 21, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Genesis 47:28 - 50:26 (Hertz, p. 180; Etz Hayim, p. 293) Triennial Year II: Genesis 49:1 - 49:26 (Hertz, p. 183; Etz Hayim, p. 298) Haftarah: I Kings 2:1 -12 (Hertz, p. 191; Etz Hayim, p. 312 Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (47:28-31) Jacob senses that his death is approaching. He asks Joseph to swear that he will not bury him in Egypt, but will return him to the ancestral burial place at the Cave of Machpelah in the land of Canaan. (48:1-9) Joseph brings his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, to Jacob to be blessed. Jacob says they will be like Reuben and Simon, i.e., equal in status to any of his sons. (48:10-22) Jacob blesses Ephraim, Manasseh, and Joseph, predicting that Ephraim, the younger, would be mightier than Manasseh, the firstborn. (49:1-26) Jacob's last words and testament to his sons, not as they are, but as they will be. This poetic passage is considered to be the most difficult in the Book of Genesis. (49:27-33) Benjamin's blessing. Jacob then instructs his sons to bury him in the family burial place at the Cave of Machpelah. Jacob dies. (50:1-6) Joseph mourns Jacob. Joseph makes all the necessary arrangements to bury Jacob in the family grave, the Cave of Machpelah, in Canaan. (50:15-21) Joseph's brothers fear that he will take vengeance on them now, but Joseph reassures them. (50:22-26) Joseph's last days. He has his brothers swear that when they return to Canaan, they will bury him there (a promise eventually fulfilled by Moses and Joshua). Joseph dies. Commentaries: A. Jacob wished to reveal the end to them, but the Shechinah departed from him, and he began to say other things. (Rashi on Gen. 49:1) B. Perhaps we are not meant to know the future lest it lead us to despair or complacency. Perhaps, when Jacob looked into the future, he saw the quarreling and bloodshed that would befall his descendants, and the

spirit of prophecy cannot abide where there is grief and sadness. (Naftali of Rophshitz quoted in Rabbi Harold Kushner's commentary to Gen. 49:1 in Etz Hayim) C. The Holy Blessed One did not want to reveal the secret of the end of days because among Jacobis descendants there will likely be people who will see that the days of the Messiah are far off and they will give up hope. For there are Jews who worship God just so that they can enjoy peace and goodness in the days of the Messiah. When they see that redemption is far off, they will assimilate and fall into despair. Therefore, the time of the Messiah is one of the mysteries that is not revealed to human beings. Thus Jacob began to speak about other matters. (Meiam Loiez on Gen. 49:1) D. To reveal the end is simply to communicate the idea of ultimate harmony. It is not a matter of graphic descriptions of the manner and the timing of redemption. It is to convince Jacob's children, on the verge of exile and diffusion, about to lose all sense of autonomy, of the intelligibility of their destiny, that their experience really does have a "ketz" - an end - an implicit order, a movement toward meaning. A certain vitality of vision is given to Jacob and then blocked off from him. For if Jacob had succeeded in conveying to his children a strong, unequivocal vision of the end, the experience of exile would have been entirely robbed of its necessary sting. That experience knows of no easy resolution. Jacobis children will have to live the absurdity and its pain, its apparently fruitless yearnings, without intoxicating visions of harmony to sustain them. What resolutions, what orderings they achieve, they will have to achieve in the immediacy, the vulnerability, the confusion of their own lives. (Aviva Zornberg in The Beginning of Desire, pp. 357-358) For discussion: Jacob calls his children to his deathbed and prepares to speak to them about events of the future. Yet, instead of revealing anything about the 'end of days," he gives a description of each son. In other words, Jacob's speech does not follow logically from the preamble. Why does God rob Jacob of this clear thinking? Why does the Shechinah depart and thereby prevent Jacob from revealing the future? Why is this knowledge unhelpful or dangerous? Some points to consider: As the above commentators suggest, it may be that the Shechinah prevented him from communicating the end of days so that the driving force behind our actions is not messianism. We can see the danger of that in our world today. It may be that we must make sense out of our lives on our own, for only in that way do we find meaning in life. Or, alternatively, perhaps such allencompassing knowledge is not meant to belong to humans. Humans are permitted only glimpses of God's total knowledge. Some people might act like know-it-alls and pretend that they are always right and everyone else is wrong, but ultimately even the most wise human being can possess only part of God's wisdom.

The berachah upon seeing a wise person testifies to that truth, for the berachah is "Praised are You, God, who has given a part (sheichalak meichochmato) to human beings. We would stand to learn much from other individuals, political parties, Jewish denominations if we were to internalize this truth.

PARASHAT SH'MOT December 28, 2002 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Exodus 1:1 - 6:1 (Hertz, p. 206; Etz Hayim, p. 317) Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 3:1 - 4:17 (Hertz, p. 213; Etz Hayim, p. 326) Haftarah: Isaiah 27:6 - 28:13; 29:22 - 23 (Hertz, p. 225; Etz Hayim, p. 343) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (1:1-14) A list of the sons of Jacob/Israel who came to Egypt. The beginning of the enslavement. The building of the store-cities and other acts of oppression. (1:15-22) The midwives disobey Pharaoh's orders to kill all male Israelite newborns. He then orders every newborn boy to be drowned in the Nile. (2:1-10) A boy is born. His parents hide him for three months. His mother puts him into a reed basket and floats him on the Nile, where he is found by Pharaoh's daughter. She names him Moses. He is raised in the royal palace. (2:11-25) Moses goes out to his people and sees their suffering. He kills an Egyptian who was beating an Israelite, and is forced to flee to Midian. He marries Zipporah and works for her father as a shepherd. Meanwhile, God hears the suffering of the Israelites, and determines to help. (3:1-10) The revelation at the "Burning Bush". Moses is called by God to be a prophet and a leader of the people. He will be God's human agent in freeing the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. (3:11-4:17) Moses expresses anxiety and doubt about his worthiness for the task. God encourages and reassures him, and gives signs to Moses to prove to the Israelites that he is indeed God's messenger. All in all, Moses refuses God's assignment five times, and God provides five counter arguments. Finally, Moses accepts the task. (4:18-23) Further instructions from God to Moses. (4:24-26) A peculiar incident during the journey to Egypt: Zipporah circumcises their son to ward off danger to Moses. (4:27-31) God sends Aaron to meet Moses, and together they convince the people that God has sent them. (5:1-6:1) Moses and Aaron's first confrontation with Pharaoh fails. Pharaoh retaliates by oppressing the Israelites even more harshly. The Israelites blame

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

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

PARASHAT VA-ERA January 4, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Exodus 6:2-9:35 (Hertz, p. 232) Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 7:8 - 8:15 (Hertz, p. 236) Maftir: Numbers 28:9 - 15 (Rosh Hodesh Shevat) (Hertz, p. 695) Haftarah: Isaiah 66:1 - 24 (Hertz, p. 944) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (6:2-9) God reminds Moses of the Covenant He made with the patriarchs, and announces to him the coming redemption of the Israelites from slavery. Moses tells the Israelites, but they are too fearful to listen to him. (6:10-13) Moses is disheartened, and reluctant to go before Pharaoh. (6:14-27) The genealogy of the tribe of Levi. (6:28-30) Moses continues to doubt his ability to carry out his task, saying: I am of impeded speech. (7:1-7) God encourages Moses and Aaron by giving him a glimpse of the successful future of their mission. (7:8-13) Moses and Aaron demonstrate their miraculous sign before Pharaoh: the staff transformed into a serpent. Pharaoh's magicians duplicate this feat, but then Aaron's "snake" swallows up theirs. (7:14-25) The ten plagues begin. The first is the turning of the River Nile into blood. (7:26-8:11) The second plague: frogs. (8:12-15) The third plague: lice. (8:16-28) The fourth plague: beasts. Discussion Theme: Gratitude "Thus says the Lord, 'By this you shall know that I am the Lord.' See, I shall strike the water in the Nile with the rod that is in my hand, and it will be turned into blood... And the Lord said to Moses, 'Say to Aaron: Take your rod and hold out your arm over the waters of Egypt... that they may turn to blood....And the Lord said to Moses, 'Say to Aaron: Hold out your arm with the rod over the rivers'... Aaron held out his arm over the waters of Egypt, and the frogs came up

and covered the land of Egypt... Then the Lord said to Moses, 'Say to Aaron: Hold out your rod and strike the dust of the earth, and it shall turn to lice throughout the land of Egypt." (Exodus 7:17, 19, 8:1, 2, 8:12) A. Rabbi Tanchum said: Why didn't Moses smite the water, but Aaron did in his stead? The Holy Blessed One said to Moses: the waters that protected you when you were thrown into the Nile, it would be wrong for you, Moses, to strike them. They will be smitten not by you but by Aaron. (Exodus Rabbah 9:10) B. Rabbi Tanchum said: Said the Holy Blessed One to Moses: The dust that protected you after you killed the Egyptian, it would not be right for it to be smitten by you. Therefore, these first three plagues were brought on by Aaron. (Exodus Rabbah 10:7) C. "We proclaim that You are Adonai our God and God of our ancestors throughout all time. You are the Rock of our lives, the Shield of our salvation in every generation. We thank You and praise You for our lives that are in Your hand, for our souls that are in Your charge, for Your miracles that daily attend us, and for Your wonders and gifts that accompany us evening, morning, and noon. You are good, Your mercy everlasting; You are compassionate, Your kindness never-ending. We have always placed our hope in You... Praised are You Adonai, the essence of goodness, worthy of gratitude." (Modim Anachnu Lach, Daily Prayerbook) D. Ben Zoma used to say: What does a good guest say? 'How much trouble has my host gone to for me. How much meat he set before me. How much wine he brought me. How many cakes he served me. And all this trouble he has gone to for my sake!' But what does a bad guest say? 'What kind of effort did the host make for me? I have eaten only one slice of bread. I have eaten only one piece of meat, and I have drunk only one cup of wine! Whatever trouble the host went to was done only for the sake of his wife and children. (Talmud Bavli Berachot 58a) E. One who learns from another individual a single chapter, a single law, a single verse, a single expression, or even a single letter, should accord him respect. (Avot 6:3) F. I did not make the air I breathe/Nor the sun that warms me... I did not endow the muscles/Of hand and brain/With the strength/To plough and plant and harvest... I know/I am not/A self-made man." (Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser) G. Most societies value the expression of appreciation and recognize its ability to smooth the rough edges of interpersonal relations. For this reason, we make a point of teaching our children to express thanks from a very early age. We strive to instill gratitude as a habit, even if at times we know the feeling behind the gesture may be lacking. We sense intuitively that a society which devalues or denigrates the concept of gratitude-that defines relationships by functionality alone-cannot, and probably ought not to, thrive... The structure of giving thanks on a regular basis, even in hard times, encourages us to focus on the positive side of life. It does not mean that we forget the dark side, just that we keep a true perspective, giving the positive side its due... In the end, feeling and expressing gratitude is good for us. The Almighty does not 'need' our

thanksgiving. It is we who benefit from feeling and expressing it." (Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz) H. We have been recipients of the choicest bounties of heaven. We have been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity... But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own." (Abraham Lincoln) Sparks for Reflection: The point of the midrash on our parashah is that if Moses was to express gratitude to inanimate objects, then certainly we should be grateful to all those people who are responsible for who are what we are. As Rabbi Steinsaltz notes, expressing gratitude is not only the essence of menschlichkeit, it is also the essence of happiness. How do we cultivate that sense of awe and gratitude in a world where it so easy to complain and be cynical? Why is it that so many of us have what Rabbi Joseph Telushkin once called "emotional constipation," an inability to express love and gratitude, to thank those dear to us for specific favors and acts of kindness?

PARASHAT BO January 11, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Exodus 10:1 - 13:16 (Hertz, p. 248; Etz Hayim, p. 374) Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 11:4 - 12:28 (Hertz, p. 252; Etz Hayim, p. 379) Haftarah: Jeremiah 46:13 - 28 (Hertz, p. 263; Etz Hayim, p. 395) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (10:1-29) The eighth plague, locusts, and the ninth, darkness. (11:1-3) God announces to Moses the last and decisive plague, and instructs him to tell the people to prepare for leaving by asking the Egyptians for jewels and gold, which the Egyptians, overawed by events and by Moses' apparent power, readily give. (11:4-10) Moses announces the tenth plague to Pharaoh, and the slaying of all the first-born of Egypt, but God hardens Pharaoh's heart and he does not respond to this final ultimatum. (12:1-13) The Passover sacrifice in Egypt. The Israelites are commanded to take a lamb, slaughter it on the 14th of Nisan, at twilight, mark the doorposts of their houses with its blood, and eat the lamb on the eve of the 15th. On that same night, God struck down all the first-born of Egypt. (12:14-20) Passover for the generations: The Israelites are commanded to observe this festival, the 15th of Nisan, for all time. For the entire seven days of the festival they shall not eat, or even possess, any leaven. (12:21-28) Moses and Aaron convey the Passover commandments to the people. (12:29-36) The first-born of Egypt all die, and the Egyptians capitulate. The Israelites prepare to leave. (12:37-42) The Israelites leave Egypt. (12:43-13:10) The laws of the Paschal lamb sacrifice for future generations, the dedication to God of the firstborn, and further details concerning the observance of Passover.

Discussion Theme: Idolatry Today "For that night I will go through the land of Egypt and strike down every firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and I will mete out punishments to all the gods of Egypt, I the Lord." (Exodus 12:12) A. God's power to take Israel out of Egypt manifests His own exclusivity, mocks the professed divinity of pharaoh, and exposes the deities of Egypt as non gods. (Nachum Sarna) B. And Egypt was burying all their first-born whom the Lord had smitten among them; upon their gods the Lord executed judgment. C. Since there is no rainfall in Egypt, but the Nile overflows and waters the land and the Egyptians worship the Nile; He therefore plagued first their god and then them. (Rashi Exodus 7:19) D. Hapi was the Egyptian god of the Nile. The second plague struck at Heket the god who took the shape of a frog. The fifth plague, cattle< disease, attacked the gods Hathor (cow) and Apis (bull). The ninth plague, darkness, triumphed over the sun god Ra. Finally, the tenth showed the vulnerability of Pharaoh himself, the son of the Sun god. (Noam Zion and David Dishon, A Different Night) E. Then Pharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron and said, 'Go and sacrifice to your God within the land.' But Moses replied, 'It would not be right to dothis, for what we shall sacrifice the abomination of Egypt to God, our God. If we sacrifice the abominations of the Egyptians before their eyes, will they not stone us?' "It is characteristic of Judaism's attitude towards ancient and modern paganism. That which other nations sacrifice themselves is what Jews sacrifice to their God. The gods of other nations are the mighty forces of Nature to which Man must submit, as well as the powerful forces of Nature within himself to which he is subject. They worship the forces about them and within themselves. But the Jew in his sacrifice, kills the representatives of these forces, and thereby makes himself conscious of his power of mastering the forces of Nature within himself. In obtaining free control of these and submitting them to the Will of the Almighty One, he frees himself also from the dominion of all the blind external forces of Nature. He sacrifices the gods in his own inner self, and thereby breaks the chains of dominion of the external forces of Nature. (Rabbi S. R. Hirsch, Exodus 8:21-22) F. If God is the only thing in the universe worthy of worship or adoration, then anyone who becomes obsessed with the desire for wealth, beauty, fame, or power is said to idolize them. From a modern perspective then, idolatry is a universal phenomenon. Almost every country in the world has military parades that glorify power, advertisements that glorify sexual fulfillment, books that extol wealth or influence, and cults that deify movie stars and sports figures... Idolatry is a complex phenomenon that rears its head in every age. Far from being limited to the worship of clay statues, it provides ample temptation today and is likely to provide temptation tomorrow as well. Anything can become an idol if it comes to be regarded as the be-all and end-all of human life. (Kenneth Seeskin, No Other Gods)

Sparks for Reflection: The plagues described in the Book of Exodus are meant to teach both the Israelites and the Egyptians the folly of idolatry. The sources above show how at every step of the way, God's actions are a polemic against the false gods of Egypt. >The question is has idolatry disappeared for modern Jews? How does Jewish tradition help us resist the temptations of modern idolatries? How do we make sense of the statement in Sifre Deuteronomy that "Whoever acknowledges idolatry disavows the whole Torah and whoever disavows idolatry acknowledges the whole Torah?"

PARASHAT B'SHALLAH - TU B'SHEVAT, 5763 January 18, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Exodus 13:17-17:16 (Hertz, p. 265; Etz Hayim, p. 399) Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 14:15 - 16:10 (Hertz, p. 268; Etz Hayim, p. 403) Haftarah: Judges 4:4 - 5:31 (Hertz, p. 281; Etz Hayim, p. 424) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (13:17-22) The beginning of the Exodus, and its route through the desert. The pillar of cloud and the pillar of fire. (14:1-14) The Egyptians pursue the Israelites and catch up to them at the shore of the sea. The Israelites panic, and Moses reassures them. (14:15-18) God tells Moses that He will save Israel; they will cross the sea on dry land. (14:19-25) The splitting of the sea. The Israelites pass through safely. The Egyptians pursue them into the sea. (14:26-31) At God's command, Moses stretches his hand forth over the sea; its waters close up again, and the pursuing Egyptians are drowned. (15:1-21) The Song at the Sea, sung to God in praise and thanksgiving. (15:22-26) The continuation of the journey; the bitter waters at Marah. (15:27-16:36) The encampment at Elim; God feeds the Israelites with manna and quail. (17:1-7) The miracle of the water from the rock. (17:8-16) The war against Amalek, the archetype of the enemies of Israel. Discussion Theme: Glorifying God "The Moses and the children of Israel sang this song to the Lord. They said: 'I will sing to the Lord, for He has triumphed gloriously; Horse and drive He has hurled into the sea. The Lord is my strength and might; He is become my deliverance. This is my God and I will glorify Him; The God of my father and I will exalt Him'" (Exodus 15:1-2)

A. This is my God and I will glorify Him (ve-anvehu). From the root "naveh," a resting place: I will offer myself to be His home. "My whole existence and life shall be a Temple of his glorification, the 'home' of His revelation; this is the natural consequence of Him being my God. Thus, 'I will be a place unto Him,' or 'by my whole life I will prepare a place for Him, of which He will gladly say, 'And I will dwell among them.'" (Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch) B. We have Bibles in our hotels but do we have those teachings in our hearts? (Dr. Abraham Joshua Heschel) C. This is my God and I will glorify Him (ve-anvehu). From the root "naveh," a habitation and dwelling: Within me and in the deepest parts of my being, I will establish a habitation and a dwelling place for God. (Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Kotsk) D. This is my God and I will glorify Him (ve-anvehu). From the root "noi," beauty: I will speak of God's beauty and praise to all who live in the world. For example, when the nations will ask Israel, 'How is your beloved different from any other beloved?', Israel will reply: 'My beloved is white and ruddy.' (Rashi) E. This is my God and I will glorify Him (ve-anvehu). From the root, "na-eh," beautiful: I shall beautify God's commandments before Him by serving God with a beautiful sukkah, a beautiful shofar. (Talmud: Shabbat 133b) F. "Your lamb shall be without blemish, a yearling male; you may take it from the sheep or from the goats." (Exodus 12:5) "A defective gift is an insult to the recipient; hence, the harmony between the devotee and his God would be impaired by such a donation. The physical perfection of the sacrificial animal is therefore repeatedly demanded in the sacrificial regulations. An extension of this principle is the rabbinic precept of hiddur mitzvah, the obligation to perform an act designated a mitzvah in the most elegant and choice manner. (Nachum Sarna) G. Abba Shaul says: This is my God and I will glorify Him (ve-anvehu). From the combination "ani" (I) "vhu" (and He): This is my God and I shall be like Him; just as God is compassionate and loving, so must I be compassionate and loving. Sparks for Reflection What is it about the idea of "glorifying" God that led commentators to go beyond the simple meaning of the original and develop these more metaphorical interpretations of the verse? How do we recognize God's role in the world and not be self-conscious or embarrassed about articulating that role, as Rashi suggests we should? How do we build a life so that God will dwell in our midst? What does it mean to make our lives a "temple" in which God will dwell?

PARASHAT YITRO January 25, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Exodus 18:1 - 20:23 (Hertz, p. 288; Etz Hayim, p. 432) Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 19:1 - 20:23 (Hertz, p. 290; Etz Hayim, p. 436) Haftarah: Isaiah 6:1-13; 7:1-6; 9:5-6 (Hertz, p. 302; Etz Hayim, p. 452) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (18:1-12) Moses' father-in-law Jethro comes to visit, bringing Moses' wife Zipporah and his two sons. (18:12-27) Jethro advises Moses to appoint officers and judges to help him lead the people, creating the political structure for living by the Torah. (19:1-6) The people prepare to accept the covenant and receive the Torah at Mount Sinai, where they will become a "kingdom of priests and a holy nation." (19:7-15) Moses tells the elders to prepare the people to receive the revelation. (19:16-25) Dramatic phenomena accompany God's manifestation at Mount Sinai. Moses ascends the mountain. (20:1-14) The Ten Commandments. (20:15-18) The people are terrified by God's power, and they beg Moses to mediate between them and God. (20:19-23) More commandments concerning the altar. Discussion Theme: Parental Honor and Society "Honor your father and your mother, that you may long endure on the land that the Lord your God is assigning to you." (Exodus 20:12) A. The obligation to respect is enjoined only for God and parents, and the offender in either instance is liable to the extreme penalty. The parallels point up the supreme importance that the Torah assigns to the integrity of the family for the sake of the stability of society and generational continuity. Family life is the bedrock on which Jewish society stands." (Nachum Sarna) B. Speaking halachically, the key to putting oneself together in respect to the whole creation hangs on regard for one's own parents. The Halakhah (Kiddushin 30b) speaks in terms of three pillars: God and the two parents

are partners in the source of the life of the child. The parent mirrors the creation of the universe; she reflects a concept of life in which one recognizes that to be is to be related to that which is other than self and to discover existence outside of one's ego. To be is to find transcendence. In other words, to be is to know that I am who I am because others enter into my "I" ness." (Rabbi David Hartman, "The Family As Mirroring Theological Commitment") C. The aim of this mitzvah is for a man to recognize and bestow kindness upon one who has done him good and that he not be base, a dissimulator, and one who denies the good done him by another... It is for a person to realize that his father and mother are the cause of his being in the world; hence in very truth it is proper for him to give them every honor and every benefit that he can." (Sefer Hachinuch) D. The father endows the child with five virtues: beauty, strength, riches, wisdom, and longevity... And just as the father has granted the child these five gifts, so does the child owe him five things: to feed, provide drink, clothe, placing shoes upon them, and guide. (Talmud Yerushalm, Kiddushin 16a) E. Any stable society, and certainly any ethical one fashioned upon the principles of justice, morality, and the protection of inalienable rights, just rest upon a staunch and firm respect for authority and authoritative figures. At the very least, such institutions maintain order and protect society from sinking into an oblivion of chaos and anarchy... As submission to authority is indeed unnatural, this property must be acquired, inculcated at a young age. Kibbud Av Va-eim tutors children in the art and necessity of accepting another's authority... The household provides a school for the education of this habit, and hence the home forms the cornerstone of society." (Rabbi Moshe Taragin, "The Aims and Attitudes Surrounding the Mitzvah of Kibbud Av Va-eim") Sparks for Reflection In what ways is the family the crucible from which attitudes towards society emerge? What fundamental concepts or habits does the mitzvah of "kibbud av va-eim" teach? Did children honor their parents more in the past? If so, in what ways?

PARASHAT MISHPATIM February 1, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Exodus 21:1 - 24:18 (Hertz, p.305; Etz Hayim, p.456) Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 22:4 - 23:19 (Hertz, p. 290; Etz Hayim, p. 465) Haftarah: I Samuel 20:18 - 42 (Mahar Hodesh) (Hertz, p. 948; Etz Hayim, p. 1216) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (21:1-11) The beginning of the Covenant Code. Laws regarding master and slave. (21:12-17) Capital crimes. (21:18-22:3) Laws of personal injury, property damage, theft, and negligence. (22:4-14) Laws governing different kinds of property custodians: unpaid, paid, and borrowers. (22:15-26) Laws against the seducer, occult practices, and forbidding the oppression of the powerless and the weak, including the stranger, the widow, the orphan, and the poor. (22:27-30) Miscellaneous laws concerning respect for authority, gifts to the priests, and the prohibition of eating torn flesh (treifah). (23:1-9) Laws of righteous behavior toward others. (23:10-19) Laws concerning the Sabbatical year, Shabbat, and Festivals. (23:20-33) An epilogue exhorting the Israelites to follow God's law, emphasizing the rewards they will receive if they do so. (24:1-18) The covenant is ratified through a formal ceremony of acceptance. Moses and the elders eat a meal and see a vision of God. Moses alone ascends the mountain to receive the stone tablets, remaining there for forty days and nights. Discussion Theme: Oppressing the Stranger "You shall not wrong or oppress a stranger; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. You shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child. If you at all afflict them, and they cry to me, I will surely hear their cry; and my anger shall be inflamed,

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

PARASHAT T'RUMAH February 8, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Exodus 25:1 - 27:19 (Hertz, p. 326; Etz Hayim, p. 485) Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 26:1 - 6:30 (Hertz, p. 330; Etz Hayim, p. 491) Haftarah: I Kings 5:26 - 6:13 (Hertz, p. 336; Etz Hayim, p. 500) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (25:1-9) God commands that donations be taken from the Israelites for the building of the Mishkan (Tabernacle). (25:10-40) Instructions for making the Ark and its covering, the table and its accessories, and the Menorah. (26:1-30) Detailed instructions for the making of the Mishkan: the cloth covering, the gold clasps, and the goat hair tent over the Mishkan. Instructions regarding the 48 planks of the Mishkan, and their joining above by means of the rings, and inside by means of wooden bars. (26:31-35) The curtain dividing the Tabernacle and screening the Holy of Holies where the Ark was placed. (26:36-27:19) The screen for the entrance, the altar, and the enclosure or courtyard of the Mishkan. Discussion Theme: Inner Beauty "You shall then make cloths of goats' hair for a tent over the Tabernacle; make the cloths eleven in number." (Exodus 26:7) A. The coverings that serve as the roof... comprise four separate layers... The lowest layer is to comprise ten multicolored sheets of fine linen decorated with the cherubim motif... A coarser covering made of goats' hair was to be laid above the linen fabric. (Nachum Sarna) B. Paradoxically, given all the splendor with which the tabernacle was decorated within-the planks that were covered with gold, the strips of cloth made of fine twisted linen of blue, purple and crimson yarns, the vessels made of gold and the precious stones-the tabernacle was, nevertheless, covered on the outside with simple sheets made of goat's hair. This is to teach that the essence is internal beauty and splendor, not the externals of wealth which only arouse jealousy and hatred (Rabbi Y. Jacobson in Itturei Hatorah) C. What is the meaning of nobility? A person possessing nobility is one

whose hidden wealth surpasses his outward wealth, whose hidden treasures exceed his obvious treasures, whose inner depth surpasses by far that which he reveals. Refinement is found only where inwardness is greater than outward appearance. The hidden is greater than the obvious, depth greater than breadth. Nobility is the redeemed quality which rises within the soul when it exchanges the transient for the permanent, the useful for the valuable... We have learned that one can be a villain even though very cultured and expert in science. The possibility of saving the world from destruction depends on the recognition that there is a supreme criterion by which we must evaluate all human values and that there is something that rises above all the achievements of the arts and sciences... How easy it is to be attracted by outward beauty, and how it is to remove the mask and penetrate to that which is inside. If a Greek poet, for example, had arrived at Samaria, the capital of the Kingdom of Israel he would have been surprised and overcome with emotion; he would have praised and lauded in verse the idols, the beautiful temples and palaces which the kings of Israel and their ministers had built. But the prophet Amos, after visiting Samaria, did not sing, nor did he bow to the glory of the ivory buildings. When he looked at the buildings of carved stone, at the ivory temples and beautiful orchards, he saw in them the oppression of the poor, robbery and plunder. External magnificence neither entranced him nor led him astray. (A.J. Heschel "Pikuach Neshama: To Save a Soul") Sparks for Reflection How do we teach children that the criterion by which we should judge beauty is integrity, truth or goodness? As adults, how would our marketing and purchasing habits change if we took these criteria seriously? Some of the latest fashions were sewn together with the sweat and tears of the underpaid. What is beauty if it is acquired at the cost of justice?

PARASHAT T'ETZAVEH February 15, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Exodus 27:20 - 30:10 (Hertz, p. 339; Etz Hayim, p. 503) Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 28:31 - 29:18 (Hertz, p. 342; Etz Hayim, p. 508) Haftarah: Ezekiel 43:10 - 27 (Hertz, p. 350; Etz Hayim, p. 520) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (27:20-28:30) Instructions concerning the oil for the Ner Tamid, the fashioning of the ephod and breastplate. (28:31-39) The directions for the High Priest's uniform. (28:40-43) The clothing of Aaron's sons, i.e. the ordinary kohanim (priests). (29:1-18) Instructions for the ritual consecrating Aaron and his sons as kohanim. (29:19-37) Instructions for the consecration of Aaron and his sons during their seven days of inauguration. (29:38-46) Instructions concerning the Tamid, the daily sacrifice. (30:1-10) Instructions concerning the fabrication of the incense altar and its special function. Discussion Theme: Models of Spirituality "You shall make the robe of the ephod of pure blue. The opening for the head shall be in the middle of it; the opening shall have a binding of woven work round about - it shall be like the opening of a coat of mail - so that it does not tear. On its hem make pomegranates of blue, purple, and crimson yarns, all around the hem, with bells of gold between them all around: a golden bell and a pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, all around the hem of the robe. Aaron shall wear it while officiating so that the sound of it is heard when he comes into the sanctuary before the Lord and when he goes out-that he may not die." (Exodus 28:31-35) A. Because the Holy Blessed One commanded in Leviticus 15:17 that "no person should be present in the Tent of Meeting when the High Priest enters to make expiation until he leaves," God commanded that the sound be heard when the priest enters so that listeners will know to vacate the premises. (Rashbam)

B. Therefore God commanded that the bells be made in order that the sound therefrom be heard in the Sanctuary, that the priest enter before his Master as if with permission. For he who comes into the king's palace suddenly, incurs the penalty of death according to the court ceremonial... (Nachmanides) C. The tinkling attracts the attention of the worshipers outside the Tent to the fact that the High Priest is performing the ritual; or the bells sent out a message that no mishap had occurred in the course of the priestly duties such as had happened to Aaron's two sons. Another possibility is that the High Priest himself reminded by the sound of the bells on his robe that he is to attune his heart and mind to his solemn duties and that he must be fully conscious of the fact that he is in the presence of God. (Nachum Sarna) D. The bells, clappers jangling from a hollow center, symbolize a mode of spiritual ecstasy: literally, a standing outside oneself, an overwhelming consciousness of the nothingness of the human person within the priestly robes. The High Priest as he enters the sanctuary loses all sense of his own destiny, of the contingencies, the idiosyncrasies of his own existence. The bell becomes an image for a hollowness that resounds almost unbearably with God's presence. (Rabbi Yaacov Leiner, Beit Yaacov, quoted in Aviva Zornberg's The Particulars of Rapture) E. In reality, modesty is usually praised for the average person and certainly for a great leader. However, that is true only in secular or mundane matters. In matters of holiness, on the other hand, when we are dealing with matters that relate to national holiness, the sanctity of life, critical matters of destiny, then it is incumbent upon the leader to let his voice be heard loudly. He should speak confidently and commandingly to draw attention to the significance of the message. Hence, the Torah states that the sound should be heard when he enters the Sanctuary. (Chatam Sofer) Sparks for Reflection Each of the commentators presents a different model of spirituality by way of his interpretation of the bells' purpose. One model focuses on the primacy of ethics and derech eretz. Another presents a model of the worshiper losing himself, loses a focus on the self, in order to feel God's presence. Another suggests that some acts should be done with quietness; but when it comes to serving God, one should unashamedly call attention without embarrassment almost as a missionary would. Examine the commentaries above. What are the different models? Which one "resonates" within you?

PARASHAT KI TISSA February 22, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Exodus 30:11 - 34:35 (Hertz, p.352; Etz Hayim, p. 523) Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 31:18 - 33:11 (Hertz, p. 356; Etz Hayim, p. 529) Haftarah: I Kings 18:1 - 39 (Hertz, p. 369; Etz Hayim, p. 548) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (30:11-16) Instructions concerning the contribution of the half shekel as a means of taking a census of men fit for military service. (30:17-38) Instructions concerning the fabrication of the brass basin used for washing up before entering the Sanctuary and the manufacture of the anointing oil and the holy incense. (31:1-11) Bezalel is appointed in charge of the making of the Tabernacle. (31:12-17) A special warning regarding the sanctity of the Shabbat. (31:18-32:6) God gives Moses the Two Tablets of the Covenant. Meanwhile, down in the Israelite camp, the people despair of Moses' return, and demand of Aaron that he make a "god" for them. The result is the Golden Calf. (32:7-35) God tells Moses what the people are doing, and threatens to destroy them. Moses descends the mountain, sees the people dancing around the calf, and in a fit of anger breaks the tablets. The actual worshipers of the calf, 3000 in number, are put to death. Moses intercedes for his people and ascends Mt. Sinai once again. He pleads with God, who relents from destroying the entire people, though He sends a plague as punishment. (33:1-11) God tells Moses to lead the people toward the Promised Land and says that He will no longer dwell in their midst. The people must strip off their finery as an act of contrition. God continues to speak to Moses directly. (33:12-23) Moses pleads to be able to see God as a confirmation both of his authority and his relationship with God, but that request is denied, "for a human may not see Me and live." God does promise that Moses will be able to see His "back," i.e., have an indirect manifestation of His Presence. (34:1-9) Moses returns to Mt. Sinai for the third time and receives the revelation concerning God's Thirteen Attributes.

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

Sparks for Reflection What is the connection between "charut" (engraved) and "cherut" (freedom). One would have thought that Torah, with all its rules, would restrict freedom. Yet, these commentators discover ways that Torah enhances freedom. How so? What is the freedom that comes with following the laws of Torah or studying them?

PARASHAT VAYIKRA March 15, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Lev. 1:1 - 5:26 (Hertz, p. 410; Etz Hayim, p. 585) Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 3:1 - 4:26 (Hertz, p. 415; Etz Hayim, p. 592) Maftir: Deut: 25:17-19 (Hertz, p. 856; Etz Hayim, p. 1135) Haftarah: I Samuel 15:2 - 34 (Hertz, p. 995; Etz Hayim, p. 1280) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (1:1-17) The laws regarding the olah, or burnt offering. The entire animal, except for the hide, was burned to ashes on the altar. The olah described here is brought by an individual as a voluntary offering to atone for neglect of positive commandments. (2:1-16) The laws regarding the minhah, or meal offering. There were two types: communal meal-offerings brought on Passover, Shavuot, and Shabbat, and individual meal-offerings usually brought by people too poor to afford an animal or a fowl. (3:1-17) The laws concerning the zevah sh'lamim, the peace-offering or "offering of well-being." Unlike the olah, which was completely consumed on th e altar, the zevah sh'lamimwas a sacred meal, shared by donors and kohanim. (4:1-26) The laws regarding the hattat, or sin-offering. A hattat was given for sins one committed accidentally or unknowingly. (4:27-35) Similar sin-offerings, but for the individual. (5:1-26) The asham, guilt-offering. This was given when one was uncertain whether one had offended, or in a case where someone had wronged another, denied his guilt, then later his conscience bothered him and he wanted to confess and make amends. Discussion Theme: Communal Judgment “If it is the whole community of Israel that has erred and the matter escapes the notice of the congregation so that they do any of the things which by the Lord’s commandments ought not to be done, and they realize their guilt—when the sin through which they incurred built becomes known, the congregation shall offer a bull of the herd as a sin offering, and bring it before the Tent of Meeting.” (Lev. 4:13-14)

Commentary A. “Edah” is... the distinctive term for (the whole community), the entire Israelite nation—men, women, and children... It can also be used of tribal leaders meeting as an executive body, acting on behalf of the entire community... How is it possible for the entire people to err simultaneously? The thesis that verses 1-21 form a single case, propounded above, whereby the high priest’s erroneous decision causes the whole community to err, makes this eventuality highly plausible.” (Jacob Milgrom, Anchor Bible Series Leviticus, 4:13) B. “When the sin through which they incurred guilt becomes known”. The reason the verb, “becomes known,” is in the passive is because everyone in the community erred and there is no uninvolved outsider who can objectively point out the error. That discovery must come from within the community’s own ranks. (Shadal on Lev. 4:14) C. Fifty years ago... a leading Orthodox rabbi used to advise his flock that “the yarmulke is an indoor garment.” Today, Jewish males in all walks of life proudly wear a kippah, and Jewish women publicly display their identification with jewelry that incorporates Jewish symbols. Yet simultaneously, masses of Jews, including some 200,000 Jewish convert to Christianity and countless children and grandchildren of intermarriages, are disappearing into the anonymity of American society. Religious antagonism between adherents of the various branches of Judaism has reached new levels of intensity... The 1990 National Jewish Population Survey indicates that a smaller percentage of Jews affiliate with synagogues than 20 years ago. But radically new types of religious congregations are springing up to serve populations with special interests—feminists, homosexuals and particular age cohorts... At the heart of this wide-reaching transformation in religious life lies the uniquely American glorification of individualism... For the religious movements, the greatest challenge posed by the new individualism is the maintenance of religious norms. In the past, all the branches of Judaism, regardless of their differences, strongly maintained that Judaism requires its adherents to abide by norms of behavior... Today, however, both the Reform and Reconstructionist movements have empowered the autonomous individual—that is, each Jew—to pick and choos e from Judaism that which is personally meaningful. Their leaders are unwilling to characterize how the “ideal Jew” ought to behave. Conservative Judaism is under enormous pressure from within to accommodate to the new individualism. Only Orthodoxy in its various permutations seems so far able to withstand the pressure to conform to the spirit of the age. (Jack Wertheimer, Moment Magazine, August 1994) D. Of all the recent religious changes in America, few are more significant, or more subtle, than the enhanced religious individualism of our time. Americans generally hold a respectful attitude toward religion, but also they increasingly regard it as a matter of personal choice or preference. Today choice means more than simply having an option among religious alternatives; it involves religion as an option itself and an opportunity to draw selectively off a variety of traditions in the pursuit of the self. (Wade

Clark Roof and William McKinney, American Mainline Religion: Its Changing Shape and Future, 1987) E. Some of the enemies of Israel have said: “Since it appears that we cannot destroy Israel through terrorism and warfare, why not try the opposite? Make peace with the Jews and they will destroy themselves. In the absence of an external enemy, they will collapse under the weight of their internal divisions and disagreements.” There is certainly a legitimate place for disagreement in Jewish life today; I hopeall the assenting and dissenting voices will be heard. Jewish cultural and religious vitality depends on our ability to appreciate and understand how different Jews think about their history... Let us not argue who is more loyal to the Jewish people or who cares more about its continuity. Instead, let us argue about the content of that continuity.” (David Hartman, The NY Jewish Week, July 21, 1995) F. We Jews have survived so long surrounded by a sea of others that we have long since acquired the capacity to absorb... the culture and many of the behavioral patterns of those around us... And what is seeping in these days? Hatred and incivility, intolerance, and infinite anger... America is awash in hatred... in this country, the airwaves are filled with expressions of hate, with political disagreement that gets personal and vicious. Expressing hatred, whether on telephone call-in radio programs or sleazy television talk shows, has become the new mass entertainment... Has this begun to rub off on the Jews? Read my hate mail, the angry reactions that pour in response to any column that calls for supporting the peace process or that urges civility in our debates over what is best for the Jews or Israel...” (Samuel Heilman, ibid) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion The Talmud tells us that if somebody sins once and then repeats it, to him it becomes a permitted act. If he does it a third time, it becomes a commandment. We human beings have a way of rationalizing the wrong we do. The sin offering, or today's repentance, helps strip away that built-in insulation; we are encouraged to be self-reflective. But, as our passage from Leviticus 4:13 points out, the Jewish community must come before God. The process of repentance, reflection, and reform is not just an individual one; there is communal judgment. What should be the major issues that we as a Jewish community are accountable for? What are the gravest sins that “the whole community of Israel” has committed? Is it intolerance, an overemphasis on individualism, assimilation? Have we learned anything from the population studies and social critics of the 90’s?

PARASHAT TZAV March 22, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Lev. 6:1 - 8:36 (Hertz, p. 429; Etz Hayim, p. 613) Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 7:11 - 7:38 (Hertz, p. 432; Etz Hayim, p. 617) Maftir: Numbers 19:1 - 22 (Hertz, p. 652; Etz Hayim, p. 880) Haftarah: Ezekiel 36:16 - 38 (Hertz, p. 999; Etz Hayim, p. 1286 Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (6:1-16) Instructions concerning the Olah (burnt offering), the perpetual fire on the altar, and the Minhah (meal-offering); the specific meal-offering brought by Aaron and his descendants. (6:17-7:10) Instructions concerning the Hattat (sin-offering) and Asham (guiltoffering). (7:11-21) The Sh'lamim sacrifice. There are three kinds: thanksgiving, in fulfillment of a vow, and as af ree-will offering. (7:22-38) The prohibition of eating chelev, the consecrated fat covering the animal's internal organs, and blood. The portions of the sh'lamim that go to the kohanim. (8:1-5) God commands Moses to take Aaron and his sons and assemble the people for the initiation ceremony into the priesthood. (8:6-21) The priests perform a ritual purification and Aaron is dressed in his holy garments. The Tabernacle is anointed, and then Aaron. Aaron's sons are garbed. Then come a series of sacrifices as part of the consecration and purification of the Tabernacle. (8:22-36) The actual ordination ceremonies, lasting seven days. Discussion Theme: Birkat Ha-gomel – The Survival Blessing “This is the ritual of the peace-offering (well-being) sacrifice that one may offer to the Lord: If he offers it for thanksgiving, he shall offer together with the sacrifice of thanksgiving unleavened cakes with oil mixed in, unleavened wafers spread with oil, and cakes of choice flour with oil mixed in, well soaked. This offering, with cakes of leavened bread added, he shall offer along with his thanksgiving sacrifice of well-being.” (Lev. 7:11-7:13)

Commentary: A. Four categories of people are required to offer thanks (birkat ha-gomel) to God: 1) those that survived a desert or another potentially hazardous journey, 2) dangerous imprisonment, 3) serious illness, or 4) a sea voyage. From where in the Bible do we know that one who has recovered from serious illness must thank God? In Psalms 107:17-22, it is written: “There were fools who suffered for their sinful way, and for their iniquities. All food was loathsome to them; they reach the gates of death. In their adversity they cried to the Lord and He saved them from their troubles. He gave an order and healed them; He delivered them from the pits of death. Let them praise the Lord for His steadfast love, His wondrous deeds for mankind. Let them offer thanksgiving sacrifices, and tell His deeds in joyful song…”And he must utter his thanksgiving in the presence of ten, as it is written, “Let them exalt Him in the assembly of the people” - (Psalms 107:32). (Talmud Berachot 54b) B. What is the blessing that one is required to recite? “Praised are You, Lord our God, Ruler of the universe who graciously bestows favor upon the undeserving, even as He has bestowed favor on me.” The congregation responds “Amen” and says “May God who has been gracious to you continue to favor you will all that is good.” (Siddur Sim Shalom p. 402, Shulchan Aruch 219:2) C. One must recite this blessing in the presence of ten people (including the one reciting the blessing), two of which must be rabbis…but if rabbis are not present, one is not prevented from reciting the blessing. And the custom is to recite the blessing after reading the Torah because one is assured that ten people are present. And if one recited the blessing when less than ten are present, some authorities permit this and others do not. It is best in such a situation to go back and bless in the presence of ten people but omit God’s name and kingship (only say “Baruch Ata Hagomel…”). If someone else, in the presence of ten people, recited a blessing on behalf of the person rescued and said “Praised are You, Lord our God, Ruler of the universe who has been gracious to you” and the person rescued responded Amen, then the latter person has fulfilled his/her responsibility of thanking God. And similarly, if the other person said in another language, instead of Hebrew, or some variant of the traditional Hebrew formulation, “Blessed is the Compassionate One, the Ruler of the universe, who has given you to us and not to dust” and the rescued one responds Amen, then the latter has fulfilled his/her responsibility of thanking God. (Shulchan Aruch 219:3-4) D. If a man recites a blessing for his wife, for example, who just delivered a baby, and she is not present, he says: “Praised are You, Lord our God, Ruler of the universe who has been gracious to my wife” (she’gamal l’ishti kol tov). And if one recites a blessing on behalf of one’s parent at a time when the latter is not present, one says: “Praised are You, Lord our God, Ruler of the universe who has been gracious to my father/mother/teacher” (she’gamal l’avi/imi/rabi kol tov). One recites a blessing including God’s name and kingship (Baruch atah Adonai Eloheinu Melech Ha-Olam) on behalf of someone else only if one genuinely feels close to that person (as opposed to doing so just for the

sake of peace); if one recites the blessing not on behalf of a friend or relative, one omits God’s name and kingship (Adonai Eloheinu Melech Ha-Olam). (Mishnah Berurah Footnote 17-18 on 219:4) E. If one recites Gomelon behalf of himself and on behalf of others, the other people have fulfilled their responsibility even if they do not respond “Amen” (provided they intended to be included in the blessing). If one delayed in reciting this blessing, one can do so at any time subsequently.It is best not to wait, however, more than three days (Mishneh Berurah footnote 20: even if the only way to recite the blessing would be to do so without a Torah scroll, one should do so within the three days because one’s recovery or rescue, within three days, is still connected with the specific serious illness or event). (Shulchan Aruch 219:6) F. Why was an offering of bread added to the offering of thanksgiving? In order that the donor might be able to share this, the tangible demonstration of his gratitude to God, with as many of his friends and neighbors as possible. (K’li Yakar on Lev. 7:11) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion The institution of the thanksgiving offering forms the basis for the requirement to offer words of gratitude to God after rescue from times of trouble. Interestingly, expressions of gratitude are meant to be communal. According to the K’li Yakar, the one who brought the sacrifice shared the meal with the community. According to Psalm 30, which conveys the picture of a worshiper who gives thanks to God for recovery from a deadly illness, the psalmist presupposes the presence of an assembled congregation. Likewise, “Birkat Ha-gomel”, which we recite when we have recovered from a serious illness or escaped a dangerous accident, is also to take place in the presence of an assembled congregation. Whydo we take this private event and integrate it into the life of the community? We offer private prayers, but why is it so important that there is a public component as well?

PARASHAT SHEMINI March 29, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Lev. 9:1 - 11:47 (Hertz, p. 443; Etz Hayim, p. 630) Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 10:12 - 11:32 (Hertz, p. 447; Etz Hayim, p. 635) Maftir: Exodus 12:1 - 20 (Hertz, p. 253; Etz Hayim, p. 380) Haftarah: Ezekiel 45:16 – 46:18 (Hertz, p. 1001; Etz Hayim, p. 1290) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (9:1-24) Concluding the narrative of the ordination of Aaron and his sons as kohanim. On the eighth and final day of ceremonies, Moses instructs Aaron and the Israelites in the proper rituals of consecration. Aaron offers a sin-offering for himself, then Aaron. His sons offer a sin-offering on behalf of the people. Moses and Aaron bless the people. The Kavod (glory) of God descends upon the Tabernacle. (10:1-7) Nadav and Avihu, Aaron's sons, offer "strange fire" which God had not told them to offer, and they die by fire that comes forth from before God. (10:811) Kohanim are prohibited from drinking alcoholic beverages when they are to serve in the Tabernacle. (10:12-20) Instructions to the kohanim regarding the various portions of the offerings that they may eat. Moses finds that Aaron and his sons are not eating the portions of the sacrifices that belong to them, and he instructs them to do so. (11:1-12) The signs of kashrut for land animals, and sea creatures. (11:13-23) A list of forbidden birds and forbidden and permitted insects. (11:24-47) A list of animals whose dead carcasses can cause ritual defilement, and the laws regarding ritual impurity and defilement from carcasses of animals and from reptiles. A general warning to guard against defilement and to be concerned about ritual purity. Discussion Theme: Inreach and Outreach “The following you shall abominate among the birds—they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination…..the stork; herons of every variety; the hoopoe, and the bat.” (Lev. 11:13, 19)

Commentary: A. There are no overall physical criteria by which to distinguish pure birds from impure birds. Rather a long list of prohibited birds is provided, the assumption being that all others would be permitted... The impure birds are virtually all birds of prey. (Baruch Levine, JPS Commentary on Lev. 11:13) B. Why is the stork called the “chasidah,” literally, “the kind one?” For it does kindness with is companions with food. (Rashi Lev. 11:19) C. If the “chasidah” is kind towards its kin, why is it unkosher? To be kosher one must be kind not only to one’s kin but to all. (Menachem Mendel of Kotsk, Hasidic Rebbe) D. Being a Jew is a verb. Jewish living means, how do you live?... We must develop a vibrant core of committed people who care about Judaism, who learn, who are enthusiastic, and who let that radiate. We always try to get the kid who doesn’t want to go to Jerusalem to go. We forget about what to do with the kid who does go. We try to attract new people to join a synagogue, but we don’t ask sufficiently what to do with the person who is already there….Let’s not always talk about all those Jews who are alienated; instead, let’s talk about the joys of Jews who celebrate their Jewishness, who love to visit Israel, who commit themselves to the UJA campaign, who want to line up with the Jewish people. Let’s nurture them, and let those nurturers give light and fire to the rest of the Jewish world. (David Hartman, Moment Magazine) E. We must train mitzvah missionaries dedicated to missionizing Jews and bringing them in touch with higher degrees of Jewish living. The Reform Movement’s call for proselytizing non-Jews is misdirected; rather we must convert Jews to Judaism... What we must do is develop an aggressive campaign of outreach to our fellow Jews. If we know individuals who are not members of a synagogue, we must consider it our personal mission to convince them to join. If we know individuals who do not come to synagogue, we must make it our personal mission to convince them to attend, even infrequently at first. If we know individuals who never study, we must encourage them to attend an adult education lecture, if not a series of classes. There will be discomfort in seeking to encourage others to become more committed to Judaism, and we will not always be successful; people will scoff at us and make us feel uncomfortable. Nevertheless, we have a job to do if we want Judaism to continue. We do not seek new adherents to Judaism; rather, we seek new commitment from those who are already Jews. (Jerome M. Epstein, “Mitzvah Missionaries”) F. The challenge is to create compelling communities, inspired and inspiring communities, that can “sear the soul,” communities that can beckon Jews—core Jews and marginal Jews—intermarried Jews and inmarrieds—on the basis of what these Jewish communities offer as vehicles for fulfillment, for a life of meaning, of purpose, of conviction, and commitment. Experiencing such vibrant communities, all Jews will be more likely to want to learn so they can become active community members. (John Ruskay, United Jewish Communities) G. The largest Jewish community in the world is betting its future not on

generational transmission, not on recruiting the children of this generation’s committed Jews to be the next generation’s Jews, but on turning on the uncommitted or non-Jews. I doubt any Jewish community in history has attempted that feat. Moreover, this approach is based on defeatism: since we cannot rely on our strongly and moderately engaged Jews to replicate themselves, let us recruit the next generation of Jews from the periphery or even outside the Jewish community... A more sane and dignified approach would build outward from our strength. (Jack Wertheimer, Jewish Theological Seminary) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion: Commentators say that the reason the “chasidah” (stork) is “treif,” despite the connotation that it is kind (chasid), is that it only cares for its own kin. If we were to project the strategy of the chasidah onto the American Jewish community, to what extent is it “treif” to be concerned only with the affiliated? To what extent should we reach out to the unaffiliated? Are they not also our kin too? Is “outreach” a successful strategy for combating intermarriage, for example, or does it send a mixed message about intermarriage? Outreach proponents argue that community energy and resources need to be directed toward enticing marginal Jews into the mainstream by gearing programs to their interests. Inreach proponents argue that it is better to devote community energy and funds to supporting people who are committed to Jewish beliefs and practices, and whose children will become the future standard bearers of Judaism. How can outreach do more than validate what Jews do and instead challenge people to live Jewishly? How do we activate “keiruv,” outreach, that brings Jews closer to Judaism and, at the same time, take care not to transform and dilute the self-definition of Judaism and Jewish values so that they are completely palatable to the unaffiliated?

PARASHAT TAZRIA April 5, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Lev. 12:1 - 13:59 (Hertz, p. 460; Etz Hayim, p. 649) Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 13:29 – 13:59 (Hertz, p. 463; Etz Hayim, p. 655) Haftarah: II Kings 4:42 – 5:19 (Hertz, p. 466; Etz Hayim, p. 671) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (12:1-8) The laws governing a woman's state of ritual impurity after childbirth. (13:1-59) Laws concerning tzara'at, the severe skin disease resembling leprosy. If judged by the priest to have this affliction, the person was declared unclean and kept quarantined. Discussion Theme: Taking The Initiative “As for the person with a leprous affection, his clothes shall be rent, his head shall be left bare, and he shall uncover his upper lip; and he shall call out, ‘Unclean! Unclean!’ He shall be unclean as long as the disease is on him. Being unclean, he shall dwell apart; his dwelling shall be outside the camp.” (Lev. 13:45-46) Commentary A. The sufferer must warn all that approach that he is impure so that they stay away from him lest they become contaminated. (Rashi on Lev. 13:45) B. From the fact that the leper shouts “Unclean!” it teaches th at one must inform others of his anguish so that they may pray on his behalf. (Talmud Moed Katan 5a) C. An early teaching: Where is the allusion that the requirement to mark burial sites is a Torah-based requirement? Rabbi Abahu said: From the fact that the leper shouts “Unclean! Unclean!” The impurity shouts out: “Stay away!” (Moed Katan 5a) D. The Lord said to Moses, “Why do you cry out to Me? Speak to the Children of Israel and let them journey forth! And you—lift up your staff and stretch out your arm over the sea and split it; and the Children of Israel shall come into the midst of the sea on dry land...” (Exodus 14:15) E. Moses, too, was praying, and God told him, “Now, when Israel is in distress, is no time for lengthy prayer.” (Rashi on Ex. 14:15) F. If you try to do what you can, God will help you do what you cannot. (Bachya ibn Pakuda)

G. The relationship between the family and Jewish institutions is like a seesaw. The two parties on the seesaw agree to be partners. It works best if the parties are of equal weight. It works best if they agree to collaborate. So, too, family education works best if we get both the family and the institution on the seesaw. Sometimes it’s just a matter of asking. We taught each generation to send their children to a Jewish school. Now we have reached the limit of efficacy of sending our kids to be educated. We need a new model. (Vicky Kelman, The Whizin Institute) H. You claim that you want a spiritual leader. Are you prepared to let than individual guide you? I understand that you want a teacher. Are you prepared to study? You indicate that you want someone who will stimulate your children. Are you prepared to bring them to the synagogue? You ask me to inspire you in prayer. Are you prepared to pray? You note that you want your spiritual leader to stimulate the synagogue to grow in its ability to affect people’s lives. You want the synagogue to touch people in times of joy and sadness. Are you prepared to join us in that effort? (Rabbi Jerome Epstein, The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion Despite the leper’s status as victim, the leper is obligated to let the community know that he is impure. He must take some initiative. The family of the deceased is obligated to inform the community, by virtue of a gravestone, where the deceased is buried so that kohanim do not mistakenly tread in a forbidden area. Again, initiative must be taken; one cannot simply be passive and consider one’s duties fulfilled. Similarly, Moses is told that in a time of need, he, too, must act and not simply rely on God to rescue the people. By extension, Vicky Kelman argues that education requires more than simply outstanding teachers and schools but an involved family. “Drop-off Judaism”, Judaism whereby parents drop off their child at synagogue and do not, themselves, enter with their child, becomes drop-out Judaism. How do we convey to the Jewish community that spirituality requires initiative; it doesn’t just happen. If Jews want to be spiritually moved by the beautiful voice of the cantor, they must come to synagogue; if they want to be inspired by the lessons of our tradition, they must take the initiative and attend study sessions; if they want their children to have a relationship to the rabbi, they must bring their child to the synagogue; if they want the synagogue community “to be there” for them in times of need, they must be “there” for others as well. How do Jewish congregations worldwide fair vis-à-vis this type of initiative?

PARASHAT METZORA April 12, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Lev. 14:1 – 15:33 (Hertz, p. 470; Etz Hayim, p. 660) Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 14:1 – 14:32 (Hertz, p. 470; Etz Hayim, p. 660) Haftarah: Malachi 3:4 – 24; 3:23 (Hertz, p. 1005; Etz Hayim, p. 1295) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (14:1-20) Instructions concerning the ritual of purification and the sacrifices that the m’tzora (person afflicted with tzara'at) must bring in order to complete the process of ritual purification. (14:21-32) The sacrifices that the person brings if he/she cannot afford the regular ones. (14:33-57) Law of tzara'at on a house; summary of chapters 13 & 14. (15:1-33) Rules governing discharges of various bodily fluids and their effect on the ritual purity of the individual. Discussion Theme: Breakthroughs and Humility “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: This shall be the ritual for a leper at the time that he is to be cleansed. When it has been reported to the priest, the priest shall go outside the camp. If the priest sees that the leper has been healed of his scaly affection, the priest shall order two live clean birds, cedar wood, crimson wool, and hyssop to be brought for him who is to be cleansed. The priest shall order one of the birds slaughtered over fresh water in an earthen vessel; and he shall take the live bird, along with the cedar wood, the crimson wool, and the hyssop, and dip them together with the live bird in the blood of the bird that was slaughtered over the fresh water. He shall then sprinkle it seven times on him who is to be cleansed of the eruption and cleanse him; and he shall set the live bird free in the open country.” (Lev. 14:1-7) Commentary A. Cedar wood is used because it leprosy comes because of the sin of haughtiness. (Rashi on Lev. 14:4) B. The cedar, a tall and beautiful tree, serves to remind the sinner that he considered himself high and glorious; that is, the moral flaw that was punished by leprosy was haughtiness. (Tanchuma Chapter 3) C. Crimson wool and hyssop are used so that the leper learns to humble himself from his arrogance like a worm (a pun on “to-la’at” which means

D.

E.

F. G.

H.

I.

dyed wool and a worm) and like hyssop (which does not grow tall). (Rashi on Lev. 14:4) All mitzvot are best done with kavannah, intention and awareness, with the exception of humility which, if done with intention and awareness, becomes arrogance. (Menachem Mendel of Kotsk, Hasidic Rebbe) “Gossip is cathartic, empowering and comforting... one of the great luxuries of democracy. It is the tawdry jewel in the crown of free speech and free expression... It makes you interesting and boosts your selfesteem at having it to relate.” (Liz Smith, syndicated columnist for Brill’s Content, a media monthly) “We spread damaging words about others as a means of elevating ourselves.” (Chafetz Chayim, rabbinical ethicist) When God gave Moses the instructions for the paschal sacrifice, God didn’t mention using hyssop. He merely said the Israelites should take the blood of the sheep and put it on the doorposts of the lintel. Moses, apparently on his own, added that the blood should be applied with a bunch of hyssop. Putting the blood on the doorposts was an act of defiance. By using the blood of an animal considered a god of Egypt, the Israelites proclaimed the cult to be mere idolatry. Showing defiance was important not for its own sake, but to establish in the people’s minds that they were free of Egyptian bondage and idolatry, physically and emotionally. But there was a danger that self-assurance might lead to arrogance. Possibly for this reason, Moses told the elders to dip the bunch of hyssop in the blood and then apply it to the doorposts. The hyssop, traditionally considered one of the lowliest plants, was meant to inspire humility. Moses thus tried to balance the act’s defiance with the humble procedure through which the act would be accomplished. (Reuven Bulka “Hyssop’s Fables”) If one has been healed from his affliction, then certainly he has done teshuvah, has regretted hissins, and humbled himself. Why, then, must one humble oneself again “at the time that he is to be cleansed” (verse 1)? There are two times when one must humble himself: at the beginning of the repentance process when one recognizes God’s greatness and the human being’s smallness; and later after one has done teshuvah and reenters the community. (Avraham of Sokechov, Hasidic Rebbe)

Sparks for Reflection/Discussion Let’s return to the question asked by our last commentator? Why is humility required at the beginning of the teshuvah process and at the end? What does Rabbi Avraham mean that it is required when one re-enters the community? Anyone who has voluntarily started a weight-loss diet or embarked on a new exercise regimenhas experienced the sense of pride that comes from having the willpower to resist temptation and discipline the self. There seems to be a tendency to inflate our sense of self when we advance to a more healthful way of life. A similar temptation exists when we take a step forward in our spiritual lives: we find it hard to remain humble. As we become more spiritually aware, more religiously observant, or more involved in community service, we are tempted to flaunt our newly discovered level of commitment.

Therefore, the process of re-entering the community—for the leper as for us— must be done with humility. How do we balance a justified sense of accomplishment or pride in drawing closer to God with humility? How do we push forward to deeper levels of spirituality and yet advance with “hyssop in hand?” Sometimes a person can be overbearing when they proclaim, “I have the answer!” How does that apply to religious approaches?

PARASHAT AHAREI MOT April 26, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Lev. 16:1 - 18:30 (Hertz, p. 480; Etz Hayim, p. 679) Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 17:1 - 18:30 (Hertz, p. 485; Etz Hayim, p. 685) Haftarah: Ezekiel 22:1 - 19 (Hertz, p. 494; Etz Hayim, p. 709) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (16:1-28) The order of worship on Yom Kippur, including the sacrifices and the practice of the scapegoat. (16:29-34) Laws and practices of Yom Kippur, including the command to fast. (17:1-16) The prohibition of slaughtering animals any place except the Altar; the prohibition of eating blood, or eating any animal which has died (nevelah) or been torn (trefah). (18:1-30) A warning to keep away from all idolatrous practices; a list of the categories of forbidden marriage and other forbidden sexual relationships, followed by a general warning to avoid abominable behavior and follow God's ways. (9:1-24) Concluding the narrative of the ordination of Aaron and his sons as kohanim. On the eighth and final day of ceremonies, Moses instructs Aaron and the Israelites in the proper rituals of consecration. Aaron offers a sin-offering for himself, then Aaron. His sons offer a sin-offering on behalf of the people. Moses and Aaron bless the people. The Kavod (glory) of God descends upon the Tabernacle. Discussion Theme: Assimilation “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to them: I the Lord am your God. You shall not copy the practices of the landof Egypt where you dwelt, or the land of Canaan to which I am taking you; nor shall you follow their laws. My rules alone shall you observe, and faithfully follow My laws: I the Lord am your God.” (Lev. 18:1-4) Commentary A. You shall faithfully observe all My laws and all My regulations, lest the land to which I bring you to settle in spew you out. You shall not follow the practices of the nation that I am driving out before you. For it is because they did all these things that I abhorred them. (Lev. 20:22-23)

B. The substance of this mitzvah is that we should not behave like them in our way of dress and our conduct. As it was taught in the Midrash Sifra (13:9), “neither shall you walk in their customs”—that you should not follow their practices in matters that are established for them, such as theaters, circuses, and amphitheater spectacles. These are all forms of sport and entertainment that they enact in their mass gatherings, when they assemble to commit lunatic acts, immorality, and idol-worship... In the language of the Midrash Sifre (on Deut 12:30 “take head to yourself that you be not ensnared to follow them”) “ensnared to follow them” — perhaps you will emulate them and do things like them; and so they will be a snare for you. Thus you should not say, “Since they go out in velvet, I will go out in velvet”; “because they go out in helmets, I will go out in a helmet”—this being one of the pieces of armor of the horsemen. In the phrasing of the Books of the Prophets, “I will punish…all who clothe themselves in foreign attire” (Zephaniah 1:8). At the root of the mitzvah lies the purpose to have us move away from them and despise all their customs, even the way of dress. (Sefer HaChinuch Mitzvah #262) C. The deeds of the Canaanites and Egyptians were the most abominable of all the nations. The apparent implication is that there is no harm in imitating the foul deeds of nations that are not evil—but this cannot be so. By singling out these two nations, the Torah teaches Jews never to think complacently that as long as they do not commit the vulgar and obscene sins epitomized by Canaan and Egypt, they will not be corrupted by lesser sins. By focusing on the worst nations, the Torah indicates that sin is a progressive process: “Ordinary” transgressions inevitably lead to more serious ones, until the sinner descends to the morass of Canaan and Egypt. Thus, a Jew must scrupulously avoid even the first step on the road to corruption. (Moshe Feinstein, Lev. 18:3) D. Bar Kapparah said: Owing to four factors were the people of Israel redeemed from the land of Egypt: they did not alter their names; they did not change their language; they did not spread malicious gossip; they were free of sexual license (some add: and they did not change their distinctive form of clothing). (Midrash Mechilta Bo Chapter 5) E. Bar Kapparah (in contrast to the above statement by him) said: Let the words of Torah be uttered in the language of Japheth (Greek) in the tents of Shem. (Genesis Rabbah 36:8) F. For if creation in time were demonstrated—if only as Plato understands creation—all the overhasty claims made to us on this point by the philosophers would become void. In the same way, if the philosophers would succeed in demonstrating eternity as Aristotle understands it, the Law as a whole would become void and a shift to other opinions would take place. (Maimonides, Guide to the Perplexed, 2:26) G. After the Hellenization of the Near East, Jews frequently adopted Greek names…W hen the time came for Judah the Maccabee to choose ambassadors to Rome, who could best represent his Hebraic policies, he chose two men with the good Jewish names of Jason and Eupolemos… In the time of the Mishna, most Jews did not speak Hebrew... While many spoke Aramaic, countless others spoke Greek and no other language, so much so that even in the Holy Land, rabbis were very often forced to preach in Greek... In the Temple the coffers used for the

contribution of the annual half-shekel were marked, according to reliable testimony, not alef, bet, gimmel but alpha, beta, gamma, obviously in order to make those coffers intelligible to all Temple personnel... Later on, Arabic replaced Greek and Aramaic in countries under Muslim domination... Professor Elias Bickerman, the great modern Jewish Hellenist, has stressed that Alexandrian Jewry was unique in that it alone of all Hellenistic ethnic groups was able to survive as a living culture, and that it was able to do so precisely because of its ability to translate its culture, that is, to undergo a considerable amount of assimilation... A frank appraisal of the periods of great Jewish creativity will indicate that not only did a certain amount of assimilation and acculturation not impede Jewish continuity and creativity, but that in a profound sense this assimilation or acculturation was even a stimulus to original thinking and expression and, consequently, a source of renewed vitality. To a considerable degree, the Jews survived as a vital group and as a pulsating culture because they changed their names, their language, their clothing and with them some of their patterns of thought and expression... In the great challenge of assimilation in the Gaonic period the leadership followed the same procedure... In defending the traditions of Judaism, Saadiah appealed to reason and philosophy no less than to authority and precedent. In doing so, he not only appropriated intellectual tools from the surrounding Arabic world, but he himself helped to accelerate the process of assimilation of rabbinic Judaism to the canons and tastes of the intellectual Arabic society.” (Gerson D. Cohen “The Blessing of Assimilation”) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion Assimilation is typically a negatively charged word in the contemporary Jewish world. Yet, from Biblical times to modern times, the Jewish community has always appropriated new forms and ideas for the sake of our own growth and enrichment. Maimonides, for example, considered Aristotelian philosophy the most perfect intellectual tradition available to human beings and would have been prepared to reinterpret the biblical story of creation if Aristotle had provided a valid demonstration for the eternity of the universe. How do we properly channel assimilation so that it can be a blessing and not a curse? How do we balance the highly challenging intellectual power of the outside world with its enriching power to renewed creativity in the Jewish world?

PARASHAT KEDOSHIM May 2, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Lev. 19:1 - 20:27 (Hertz, p. 497; Etz Hayim, p. 693) Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 19:1 - 19:37 (Hertz, p. 497; Etz Hayim, p. 693) Maftir: Numbers 28:9 - 15 (Hertz, p. 695; Etz Hayim, p. 930) Haftarah: Isaiah 66:1-24; 1:23 (Hertz, p. 944; Etz Hayim, p. 1220) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (19:1-14) Laws of holiness, including the mitzvah of imitating God: "You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy." (19:15-22) Miscellaneous mitzvot which express the overall theme of this Torah portion, including just judicial proceedings, love of one's neighbor, and respecting elders. (19:23-37) Other mitzvot, including "orlah", the prohibition of eating a tree's fruit until its fourth year; prohibitions of pagan and occult practices;the requirements to respect the aged, treat the stranger fairly, and have honest weights and measures. (20:1-27) Miscellaneous prohibitions and a concluding passage on the laws of holiness which sanctify the Jewish people and make them distinctive among the nations. Discussion Theme: A Parental Obligation “The Lord spoke to Moses , saying: Speak to the whole Israelite community and say to them: You shall be holy, for I, the Lord your God, am holy. You shall each revere his mother and his father, and keep My sabbaths: I the Lord am your God.” (Lev. 19:1-3) Commentary A. The problem is why my child should revere me. Unless my child will sense in my personal existence acts and attitudes that evoke reverence—the ability to delay satisfactions, to overcome prejudices, to sense the holy, to strive for the noble—why should he revere me? (Abraham Joshua Heschel) B. To the extent that we are observed in action by children, we are all teachers. We become their models and what they watch forms the memories from which their own actions are drawn. Role modeling is the most powerful form of teaching, even as it was when Aristotle crystallized

the idea for his students in ancient Greece: “The soul never thinks without a picture.” (Author unknown) C. My children constantly ask me why I’ve done things I didn’t realize I was doing. They noticed even if I did not. I am astonished to hear them repeating verbatim entire sentences I’ve uttered days before—including words I’d rather not have them know. Whenever I don’t give money to a homeless person on the street they demand an explanation. Every action or omission conveys some message that our children receive, and that is all the more true of minute interactions with them, multiplied by the tens of thousands every year. We either teach Torah or something else at every moment, “when we lie down and when we rise up.” If we do not teach Torah enough of the time, the opposite of Torah will prevail in the world... Home remains, even now when we spend so much time outside of it, the center of the moral self’s activity and so of its concern... Home is the daily battleground where theory and practice skirmish, and so the place where the Torahs’ words are most often heeded, stifled, distorted, or ignored. Deuteronomy takes a child’s-eye view: unimpressed by books that he or she cannot read, but impressed for life by what goes on about the house...” (Arnold Eisen, “Taking Hold of Torah”) D. The father is bound in respect to his son, to circumcise him, redeem him if he is a firstborn, teach him Torah, take a wife for him, and teach him a craft. Some say to teach him to swim too. (Talmud Kiddushin 29a) E. The parent imparts information and in addition creates a living environment which embodies educational values. Values are not only transmitted through formal learning but also through the living and intimate community of the family... In moments of crisis, one derives the strength to overcome weakness and temptation not only from one’s critical reasoning powers, but also from “significant others” who have impressed themselves upon one’s consciousness. Parents as living models can instill courage in moments of crisis. (David Hartman, “Memory and Values”) Sparks For Reflection/Discussion The Talmud’s discussion in Tractate Kiddushin of a child’s obligation to parents begins with parents’ obligations to children. One would have thought that the obligations of a child towards parents would have taken priority given that the Torah commands children to revere parents (Lev. 19:1-3) and honor them (Exodus 20:12 and Deuteronomy 5:16). How do you explain that paradox? What are the obligations that parents have towards children? To what extent is the fulfillment of those obligations a precondition for children fulfilling the obligation to revere and honor their parents?

PARASHAT EMOR May 10, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Lev. 21:1 - 24:23 (Hertz, p. 513; Etz Hayim, p. 717) Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 22:17 - 23:22 (Hertz, p. 517; Etz Hayim, p. 722) Haftarah: Ezekiel 44:15 - 31 (Hertz, p. 528; Etz Hayim, p. 734) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (21:1-22:15) Prohibitions against the priest (kohen) coming near a dead person. The marital laws of the priest, and the special holiness of the High Priest (Kohen Gadol) concerning marriage and bereavement. (21:16-22:16) Laws concerning a kohen who has been rendered ritually impure. Who is permitted and forbidden to eat the meat of the sacrifices. (22:17-33) Defects that disqualify an animal from being sacrificed, and other related laws. (23:1-34) Laws concerning the holiness of Shabbat, Passover, the bringing of the first omer offering, the counting of the omer, and the holiday of Shavuot. Laws concerning Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, and Sukkot. (24:1-9) The Ner Tamid (Eternal Light) and the Showbread, twelve loaves left on display in the Tabernacle. (24:10-16) An incident of blasphemy and the punishment of the blasphemer: death by stoning. The law of blasphemy for the future. (24:17-23) Other laws which have major penalties - murder and causing severe injury. Discussion Theme: The Centrality of Shabbat “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to them: These are My fixed times, the fixed times of the Lord, which you shall proclaim as sacred occasions. On six days work may be done, but on the se venth day there shall be a Sabbath of complete rest, a sacred occasion. You shall do no work; it shall be a Sabbath of the Lord throughout your settlements.” (Lev. 23:1-3) Commentary A. Leviticus 23 is a calendar of the annual festivals celebrated in biblical times... In conformance with biblical tradition, this calendar also includes the Sabbath, even though it is not, technically speaking, a calendrical

B.

C. D.

E.

F.

G.

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

PARASHAT B'HAR May 17, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Lev. 25:1 - 26:2 (Hertz, p. 531; Etz Hayim, p. 738) Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 25:29 - 26:2 (Hertz, p. 535; Etz Hayim, p. 742) Haftarah:Jeremiah 32:6 - 27 (Hertz, p. 539; Etz Hayim, p. 758) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (25:1-7) The land shall be sanctified through the shemittah, the Sabbatical year of agricultural rest. (25:8-17) Also, every 50th year is a Jubilee, in which all land and slaves are to be released. The land returns to its original owners, the slaves are freed. Thus, no land is sold forever; it is in effect a lease until the next Jubilee, which must be reckoned in the price. (25:18-22) Faithful observance of these laws is to be rewarded with ample crops in the sixth year of the seventh cycle, so that there will be enough food for two years. (25:23-38) Even between Jubilee years, families must help impoverished relatives regain their holdings. An Israelite or resident alien who becomes impoverished should be loaned money at no interest. (25:39-55) Laws limiting the power of a slave owner. (26:1-2) Laws against idolatry, and for the observance of Shabbat. Discussion Theme: The Spiritual Meaning of Israel “If your kinsman, being in straits, comes under your authority, and you hold him as though a resident alien, let him live by your side: do not exact from him advance or accrued interest, but fear your God. Let him live by your side as your kinsman. Do not lend him money at advance interest, or give him your food at accrued interest. I, the Lord, am your God, who brought you out of the landof Egypt, to give you the landof Canaan, to be your God.” (Lev. 25:35-38) Commentary A. “To give you the land of Canaan” as a reward for accepting My commandments upon yourselves. “To be your God” for whoever resides in the Land of Israel, I am a God to him; and whoever leaves it is like one who worships idols. (Rashi on Lev. 25:28)

B. The connection between God and the Jewish people is dependent on settling the Land of Israel, for in Israel the Holy Presence dwells and it is the land chosen for prophecy and holiness. (Baruch Epstein, Torah Temimah on Lev. 25:38) C. One should always dwell in the Land of Israel and not in the Diaspora, for anyone that leaves Israel for the Diaspora is as if he worships idols. (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 5:12) D. Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua and Rabbi Yochanan Ha-Sandlar were on their way to study Torah outside of the Land of Israel. When they reach Sidon in Lebanon, they remembered the Land. They began to cry and they rent their garments and they recited the verse Deut. 11:31-32: “When you have occupied it and are settled in it, take care to observe all of the laws...” Said they: Dwelling in Eretz Yisrael is equal to all the other commandments in the Torah. Whereupon they turned around and went back to Israel. (Sifre Devarim - paragraph 80) E. Rabbi Simlai expounded: Why did Moses our teacher yearn to enter the Land of Israel? Did he want to eat of its fruits or satisfy himself from its bounty? But thus said Moses: “Many mitzvot were commanded to Israel which can only be fulfilled in Eretz Yisrael. I wish to enter the land so that they may all be fulfilled by me.” (Talmud Sota 14a) F. Whoever moves to Israel for the sake of heaven and conducts himself in holiness and purity, there is no end to his reward, provided that he can support himself there. (Meir of Rothenburg, 13th century) G. Israel is not just a place--it's a story. And it's not just any story--it's our story, your story, the story of where we've come from, and the story of where we're going. It's a story that our people have been telling for a long time, and we feel a need to be part of it… This is the first chance in 2000 years that the Jews have had to see if we can use our tradition to create a society that is different--and, yes, better--than the places we all left to come here. If we build a fair and decent country, where people are treated well and where even people we disagree with are allowed to express their views, it will be our doing and we'll have the right to be proud of it. For the first time in centuries, it is Jews who will decide how to treat poor people, how we should take care of immigrants, what we will do with criminals, how we should run the schools and educate the next generation. Here, in this country, it's Jews who will decide how to treat the Arab minority fairly without losing the Jewish character of this country, how to use the power of the army in a just way, how to preserve the memory of what's happened to the Jews without becoming only bitter and angry... I hope that as you grow older, you'll think you were fortunate that we brought you here. Fortunate to grow up in a country where kids are still freer and more carefree than in any other place we know. Lucky to be in a place where your history--your story--pops up every day and reminds you who you are. Lucky to be in a place that for thousands of years and for millions of Jews was merely a dream, but for you is home. Blessed to be in a place that's new enough that you can make a difference if you try. And lucky enough to be in a place that's important, that's even worth fighting for. (Daniel Gordis, If A Place Can Make You Cry)

H. There is no answer to Auschwitz... To try to answer is to commit a supreme blasphemy. Israel enables us to bear the agony of Auschwitz without radical despair, to sense a ray of God’s radiance in the jungles of history... (Abraham Joshua Heschel) I. I write all these things as someone who considers himself lucky to live in Israel—not because I think it is utopia but because Israel is the only place in which a Jewish person can live with the vital ingredients of the history and culture and mental life of all the generations of Jews that have preceded him, and can realize them in the creation of a new and modern reality... This is what it all comes down to: Not to be foreign. To belong. To be a partner with equal rights and obligations, a native and an organic part of this great body... Living means not just defending the borders, as Israel does with great effectiveness, but also doing something about what is going on within those borders. (Israeli author David Grossman in New Yorker, April, 20, 1998) J. Israel is one of history’s soaring proclamations of mankind’s worth to itself and to its Creator... Israel began with nothing much more than sand, hope and belief. And yes, fifty years later, it is indeed the Mideast’s only democracy, a growing center of science, technology, art, music. Israel is not a dirge—but a country. (A.M. Rosenthal, NY Times, 4/28/98) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion Leviticus 25:38 led Rashi, based on the Talmud Ketubot 110b, to make a radical statement about the significance of dwelling in Israel. It compares the one who dwells outside the Land, or someone who leaves the Land, to an idolater. Perhaps less radical a claim might be: Israelcompletes us spiritually in a way that living outside the Land does not. The question is: in what way does Israel contribute to our identity as Jews? What spiritual dimension does it add to our lives? And when we visit, do we visit as pilgrims or as tourists? Shlomo Riskin once wrote, “Israelis not Disneyland.” If that is the case, what spiritual meaning does Israelhave beyond being a tourist site? To what extent do we feel part of the story of our people when we visit Israel?

PARASHAT B'HUKKOTAI May 24, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Lev. 26:3 - 27:34 (Hertz, p. 542; Etz Hayim, p. 747) Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 26:3 - 27:15 (Hertz, p. 542; Etz Hayim, p. 747) Haftarah: Jeremiah 16:19 – 17:14 (Hertz, p. 551; Etz Hayim, p. 762) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Torah Portion Summary (26:3-13) The blessings of peace and prosperity Israel will receive if they follow the way of Torah and mitzvoth. (26:14-46) The curses and punishments that Israel will suffer if they violate the covenant, including defeat in war, famine and exile. It concludes with words of comfort; if the people of Israel will return to God in repentance, God will forgive them. (27:1-13) Laws concerning a vow to donate the valuation of a person and of an animal to the Temple. The Torah sets forth specific shekel amounts for different aged males and females. Pledges of animals to the Sanctuary. (27:14-29) Laws concerning the redemption of houses and fields, the redemption of the firstborn, and the devotion of property to the Temple. (27:30-34) Laws concerning the tithe of fruit, sheep and cattle; the conclusion of the Book of Leviticus. Discussion Theme: Torah Study “If you follow My laws and faithfully observe My commandments, I will grant your rains in their season, so that the earth shall y ield its produce and the trees of the field their fruit.” (Lev. 26:3-4) Commentary A. “If you follow My laws”: One might be able to think that this refers to fulfillment of the commandments. When it says “and faithfully observe My commandments,” see that fulfillment of the commandments has been stated. What, then, do I maintain is meant by “If you follow My laws?” That you should be laboring in the Torah. (Rashi on Lev. 26:3) B. “You will go/You will follow” connotes movement from place to place, and alludes to the process of Torah study, in which one regularly progresses to increasingly more sophisticated levels of understanding. “Go/follow” also means “you will walk,” which can be a laborious activity; thus “you

shall be laboring in Torah.” (Gur Aryeh on Lev. 26:3) C. The words “you should be laboring in the Torah” found in Rashi on Leviticus 26:3 do not simply mean that one should be constantly engaged in the study of Torah. Rather, these words refer to how we view our livelihood and everything we do. The obligation of the Jew is to ensure that our lives and everything we do is done in the spirit of the Torah. Our sages illustrate this with the following illustrations: A man earns his livelihood in the field. He plows and sows, harvests and reaps. While working in the field, the observant Jew fulfills the mitzvah of “kilayim” (making sure not to mix seeds), “leket, shich-cha, and peah” (the obligation to leave part of the field for the poor). In that way he is laboring in the way of Torah. Likewise, business people who uphold standards of ethics in the workplace and do not commit even subtle acts of fraud are also laboring in the way of Torah. Similarly, one can interpret the statement in Pirkei Avot (6:4), “and in Torah one should labor,” to mean that all one’s labor in life should be guided by Torah and be conducted in the spirit of its commandments. (Moshe Elyakim Mikoznitz) D. The Talmud Kiddushin 30b states that “If you occupy yourselves with the Torah, you will not be delivered into the hands of the evil inclination, but if you do not occupy yourselves with Torah, you will be delivered into its hands.” The only escape route lies through “occupying oneself with the Torah.” What does that mean? The expression ‘esek... refers to an activity which forms a person’s main pre-occupation, which wills all his heart and soul and which he pursues single-mindedly all his waking hours….This is how we are commanded to pursue the goal of Torahknowledge…But what of someone who is engaged in a business or profession? Is it not inevitable that he must take his mind off the Torah? The truth is that it is by no means inevitable. As is well known, the tribes of Yissachar and Zevulun made a pact: Zevulun would go out in ships and trade, and from their profits they would supply the needs of Yissachar, who would sit and occupy themselves with the Torah. But in fact both Zevulun and Yissachar were occupied with the Torah: one in learning it and one in supporting it. The driving force in their lives was identical: to magnify and glorify the Torah of Hashem... I have seen with my own eyes a simple craftsman, a tailor, ignorant of Torah-knowledge, whose occupation nevertheless was all Torah. All his thoughts, all his ambitions, were concentrated on one point only: that his sons and sonsin-law should be great in Torah. He was prepared to live on bread and water himself so that part of his meager earnings could be set aside for this holy purpose. All his work was thus nothing but “Torah occupation”: he was an example of a life devoted to Torah. But it has never been permitted, God forbid, to the holy people of Israel to occupy themselves with material pursuits in such a manner that the point of inner aspiration should be directed toward material ends for their own sake: to “live comfortably,” “to have a good time,” and so on. (Eliyahu Dessler) E. The halachot relating to consumer transactions are diametrically opposed to the skewed societal values that have taken root in the United States today: A) We consumers are the only ones who count. B) The bottom line is the only thing that matters. C) We are measured by what we possess, i.e. we are what we have. The Torah attempts to shake us

loose from such values by insisting that: A) We are not the only ones who count. Those with whom we engage in commercial transactions, e.g. merchants, were also created in God’s image and we are responsible for their economic and emotional well-being. B) What counts is our ethical behavior while we are achieving the object of our shopping ventures. C) We are not what we consume. Rather, our essence lies in how we use our possessions in pursuing the goals set by God, and in treating our possessions as gifts from Him. By applying spiritual values to this most materialistic of pursuits, we can counteract the influence of a society that increasingly values “what” over “who.” (Saul Berman “The Halakhot of Shopping") Sparks For Reflection/Discussion To reap the rewards of our parashah, one must, according to Rashi, engage in Torah study and observe mitzvot. Yet, the requirement to study Torah is so encompassing that it would seem that there would be little time for anything else. Each of the above commentaries sets up a model by which we can both pursue a livelihood and labor in Torah. Some of the other commentators make a close reading of Rashi on our verse in Leviticus and observe that he did not use the language of “studying” Torah but “laboring” in Torah. Rabbi Moshe Elyakim Mikoznitz interprets that to mean that anyone’s profession can be holy work because every profession involves specific mitzvot. Rabbi Dessler argues that as long as one labors in the name of a higher purpose, one is laboring in Torah. Rabbi Berman argues that one labors in Torah when one engages in worldly pursuits (even shopping) if one upholds the Torah’s unique values and its standards of honesty and fair dealing. Are these models possible with the professional lives that we lead? How can we, on the one hand, fulfill our tradition’s demand to labor in Torah and, on the other hand, still pursue a livelihood? Of course, we could attend synagogue adult education programs – but what else can we do to meet the standard of “laboring” in Torah?

PARASHAT B'MIDBAR May 31, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Num. 1:1 - 4:20 (Hertz, p. 568; Etz Hayim, p. 769) Triennial Cycle II: Num. 2:1 - 3:13 (Hertz, p. 572; Etz Hayim, p. 774) Haftarah: I Samuel 20:18 - 42 (Hertz, p. 948; Etz Hayim, p. 1216) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Everyone Has Something To Teach "This is the line of Aaron and Moses at the time that the Lord spoke with Moses on Mount Sinai. These were the names of Aaron's sons: Nadav, the first-born, and Avihu, Eleazar and Itamar; those were the names of Aaron's sons, the anointed priests who were ordained for priesthood." (Numbers 3:1-3) Commentary A. A beraita teaches: Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmani said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: Anyone who teaches his friend's child, Scripture regards that person as if he/she gave birth to that child, as it says in Numbers 3:1 "This is the line of Aaron and Moses" after which the Torah states in Numbers 3:2 "These were the names of Aaron's sons." This juxtaposition of verses teaches that Aaron bore them but Moses taught them, and thus those children are identified as his too. (Sanhedrin 19b) B. To what extent is one obligated to teach one's child Torah? Rav Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel: Learn the answer from the example of Zevulun ben Dan, a student in the days of the rabbis. For his grandfather taught him Scripture, Mishna, Talmud, the laws and the legends of our traditionà.This position of Shmuel's is similar to what is taught in a beraita: Deuteronomy 11:19 states "You shall teach them to your children," from which we learn that one has an obligation to teach children. From where do we know that one has an obligation to teach grandchildren? It is learned from the verse in Deuteronomy 4:9 which states (But take utmost care and watch yourselves scrupulously, so that you do not forget the things that you saw with your own eyes and so that they do not fade from your mind as long as you live.) And make them known to your children and to your children's children." Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Anyone who teaches his grandchild Torah, Scripture regards that person as if he or she received it on Mount Sinai. (Kiddushin 30a) C. Anyone who has the obligation to learn Torah has an obligation to teach it. (Kiddushin 29b) D. Moshe received the Torah from Sinai and handed it on to Joshua and Joshua to the Elders and the Elders to the Prophets and the Prophets to the members of the Great Assembly. They said three things: Be

E.

F.

G.

H.

deliberate in judgment; raise us many disciples; and make a fence around the Torah. (Avot 1:1) Up to this point, we may suppose that Judaism is a religion for professors of law and public administrators and for their students. Nothing could be further from the truth. For the climax of the first saying refers to Torah, and Torah speaks to all Israel, not only to judges and apprentices. What the age does, everyone should do-it is not merely an issue of knowledge. In all, the message of the men of the great assembly sets the stage for what follows. For it has two points of interest: the life of doing, hence, judging and teaching; and the life of learning, hence, Torah. (Jacob Neusner, Torah From our Sages: Commentary on Pirkei Avot 1:1) Our sages say: Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: If one withholds a teaching from his pupil, it is as though he has robbed him of his ancestral heritage, as it is written in Deuteronomy 33:4, "Moses gave us the Torah, the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob." (Sanhedrin 91b) Rabbi Yannia was once walking along the road, and saw a man who was extremely well endowed. Assuming he was an important, scholarly, influential man, Rabbi Yannai said to him: Would you like to come to our house? The man replied: Yes. Rabbi Yannai brought him into his home, and gave him food and drink. And as they were eating and drinking together, he examined him in his knowledge of Bible, and found out that he had none; examined his knowledge of Mishnah, and realized that he had none; his knowledge of legends, and saw that he had none; his knowledge of Talmud and saw he had none. Rabbi Yannai then told him: Wash and recite grace. Said the guest: Let Yannai recite grace in his own home. Seeing that he could not even recite a blessing, Yannai told him: Can you at least repeat what I say? Said he: Yes. Said Rabbi Yannai: Instead of grace after meals, say: 'A dog has eaten Yannai's bread.' Offended, the man stood up, and grabbed Rabbi Yannai, saying: My inheritance is with you, and you are withholding it from me! Said Rabbi Yannai with puzzlement: What legacy of yours is there with me. He replied: Once I passed by a school, and I heard the voices of the little children saying, 'Moses gave us the Torah, the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob.' They did not say 'the inheritance of the congregation of Yannai,' but the 'congregation of Jacob.' (Midrash Leviticus Rabbah 9:3) The Torah does not belong to Rabbi Yannai and his friends but to the entire Jewish people. The Torah is not the property of a certain group or brotherhood. In the Jewish people, there is no sect of "knowers" to whom, and to whom alone, the Torah was given. Rather, the Torah is for the entire Jewish peopleàWe are commanded and obligated to make sure that it will reach the hands of all of its potential inheritors, all those who belong to "the congregation of Jacob." Our great task is to create a Jewish mission: not to convert Gentiles, but to proselytize Jews.One who holds even a tiny portion of this treasure, of this estate of the entire Jewish people, has no right to keep it for himself, for it belongs to all... This is a direct, personal calling; it is not the responsibility of lawyers or of specially committed institutions or organizations. It is the simple, humane duty incumbent upon me, who sees the princes roaming the

streets naked and barefoot, while I am holding their plundered property in my hand." (Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz "Heritage and Inheritance") For discussion: Each of these sources describes an obligation to teach that goes beyond our obligation to teach our own children. We have an obligation to be teachers to our grandchildren, to our friends' children, to all in the "congregation of Jacob." To paraphrase the Talmud, once we have learned Torah, we have an obligation to teach that Torah. And we pray to God everyday before the Shema for the courage and inspiration to "learn and to teach, to preserve and observe, and to fulfill all the words of the Torah." Yet, while we may see ourselves as teachers of our children, we are reluctant to be Torah missionaries to our fellow Jews. What prevents us from taking up Rabbi Steinsaltz's challenge "to create a Jewish mission: not to convert Gentiles, but to proselytize Jews?" Rabbi Jerome Epstein, Executive Vice Pres. of the USCJ, echoes this challenge when he writes: "Our challenge is to establish and train a serious corps of Conservative Mitzvah Missionaries in our synagogues who will be dedicated to missionizing Jews and bringing them in touch with higher degrees of Jewish living." If the very future of Jewish life is at stake, how do we combat the discomfort we may feel encouraging others to become more committed to Judaism?

PARASHAT NASO June 14, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Num. 4:21 - 7:89 (Hertz, p. 586; Etz Hayim, p. 791) Triennial Cycle II: Num. 5:11 - 6:27 (Hertz, p. 589; Etz Hayim, p. 796) Haftarah: Judges 13:2 - 25 (Hertz, p. 602; Etz Hayim, p. 812) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Women Studying Torah "The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to them: If any man's wife has gone astray and broken faith with him in that a man has had carnal relations with her unbeknown to her husband, and she keeps secret the fact that she has defiled herself without being forced, and there is no witness against her-but a fit of jealousy comes over him and he is wrought up about the wife who has defiled herself; or if a fit of jealousy comes over one and he is wrought up about his wife although she has not defiled herself, the man shall bring his wife to the priestà. The priest shall adjure the woman, saying to her, 'If no man has lain with you, if you have not gone astray in defilement while married to your husband, be immune to harm from this water of bitterness that induces the spell. But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and have defiled yourself, if a man other than your husband has had carnal relations with you may the Lord make you a curse and an imprecation among your people, as the Lord causes your thigh to sag and your belly to distend." (Numbers 5:11-14, 19-21) Commentary Immediately upon drinking the water, her face would turn yellow, her eyes would bulge, and her veins would swell. And they would say: Take her out of the Courtyard. If she had merit, it would protect her from the effects of the water. Some merit protects for one year, some for two, and some for three. From here Ben Azzai learned: A man is obligated to teach his daughter Torah so that if she should drink these waters, she would know that merit will protect her. Rabbi Eliezer says: Anyone who teaches his daughter Torah teaches her lewdness. Rabbi Joshua says: A woman prefers one measure of lewdness to nine measures of separation. (Mishnah Sota 3:4) Phew! Let's see what all this means to us - in our time. A. Ben Azzai feels that this ability to use Torah to ward off the devastation of the bitters waters is advantageous. Therefore he declares that every father should teach his daughter Torah. With that merit, the waters, if ever tasted, would be rendered null and void. Rabbi Eliezer responds by saying that Torah should not be used for such a purpose. Firstly, it would

give women carte blanche to commit immoral acts, knowing that their Torah learning would make them immune to the effects of the bitter waters. Secondly, Rabbi Eliezer may have been saying that using Torah for this type of personal insurance policy would be an outrage and an abuse of the power of Torah. From this perspective, Rabbi Eliezer's statement is not a sweeping restriction of women's place in Torah study. The statement rather teaches us the important lesson that while all of us should continue to strive to learn more and reach higher, any Torah learning is valueless unless it is used to enhance our personal morality and foster a closer relationship to God. (Avi Weiss "The Sotah Teaches Us the True Purpose of Torah Learning") B. The word Torah ("whoever teaches his daughter Torah") does not here refer to the entire Torah, written and Oral. The word has very limited meaning in this Mishnah, referring specifically to the law of Sotah as outlined in the Mishnah's discussion. The Mishnah might, therefore, be understood as follows: if a woman drinks the bitter waters and does not immediately show signs of guilt, she may still be guilty but the signs may be delayed up to three years in concession to the meritorious deeds which she has performed in her lifetime. On this basis, Ben Azzai says that a man should teach his daughter the rules of Sotah so that if she should drink the bitter waters and not receive immediate punishment she should not think she has evaded the consequences of her sin. Rather, she may expect the signs of guilt to appear within three years if she is, in fact, culpable. Ben Azzai is concerned that a father should impress upon his daughter the importance of marital fidelity. She should be taught that she cannot escape punishment for immoral behavior even if that punishment is sometimes delayed. Opposing this opinion is Rabbi Eliezer, who holds that a father who teaches the law of this Mishnah to his daughter is teaching her obscenity. She will come to think that she can get away with immoral behavior, believing that the meritorious actions to her credit will defray any punishment. If her father explains that she may escape punishment for up to three years, it is possible for her to think she can escape altogether. Drinking the bitter waters might not then be seen as the terrible experience that it is supposed to be and a woman might think that she could behave immorally and still avoid retribution. This interpretation of the Mishnah would preclude the use of Rabbi Eliezer's statement as a general prohibition to teach Torah to women. Rather, there is here a specific opinion on a specific case and does not necessarily indicate that Rabbi Eliezer thought that women were "unfit for study." (Marc Angel, "Understanding and Misunderstanding Talmudic Sources") C. Ben Azzai presents the reason a man is obligated to teach his daughter Torah. If she studies Torah, she will know that if she commits adultery, her punishment will be postponed because of the good deeds she has done in the past. It is hard to imagine a more absurd rationale for teaching women Torah!à.It is doubtful that he is more forgiving of adultery. More likely, his statement indicates his repudiation of the entire Sotah ritual. Not only does merit protect, as already stated, but a woman should be entrusted with this knowledge in advance in order to alleviate her fear of what Ben Azzai considers to be an excessively harsh ritual.

Interpreted this way, Ben Azzai's statement is yet another example of the rabbis' ability to reflect and comment upon women's unfair lot in life. He seems to say that this ritual is such a travesty of justice that the only way to rectify matters is to teach women Torah, so that they know that nothing will happen to them for a long time if they drink the water, even if guilty. (Judith Hauptman in "Re-reading the Rabbis: A Woman's Voice") For discussion: In the last century, a revolution has taken place in terms of women and Torah study. The prohibition against teaching women Torah has been ignored or counter-argued. The establishment of seminaries for girls, co-educational day schools, and Stern College for Women shows that even in the Orthodox movement radical innovations have taken place. In egalitarian circles, it is taken for granted that women may and should study Torah. Yet, if one's position is based in halachah, then that position must reconcile itself with traditional sources like Rabbi Eliezer's statement in Mishnah Sotah. Which of the arguments above seems most cogent? Is there another interpretation of the Mishnah that you would offer?

PARASHAT B'HA-ALOT'CHA June 21, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Num. 8:1 - 12:16 (Hertz, p. 605; Etz Hayim, p. 816) Triennial Cycle II: Num. 9:15 - 10:34 (Hertz, p. 609; Etz Hayim, p. 821) Haftarah: Zechariah 2:14 - 4:7 (Hertz, p. 620; Etz Hayim, p. 836) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Doesn't God Know Our Needs? "The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Have two silver trumpets made; make them of hammered work. They shall serve you to summon the community and to set the divisions in motion. When both are blown in long blasts, the whole community shall assemble before you at the entrance of Meeting; and if only one is blown, the chieftains, heads of Israel's contingents, shall assemble before you. But when you sound short blasts a second time, those encamped on the south shall move forward. Thus short blasts shall be blown for setting them in motion, while to convoke the congregation you shall blow long blasts, not short ones. The trumpets shall be blown by Aaron's sons, the priests; they shall be for you an institution for all time throughout all ages. When you are at war in your land against an aggressor who attacks you, you shall sound short blasts on the trumpets, that you may be remembered before the Lord your God and be delivered from your enemies. And on your joyous occasions-your fixed festivals and new moon days-you shall sound the trumpets over your burnt offerings and your sacrifices of well-being. They shall be a reminder of you before your God: I, the Lord, am your God." (Numbers 10:1-10) Commentary A. Numbers 10:9 states, "When you are at war in your land against an aggressor who attacks you, you shall sound short blasts on the trumpets, that you may be remembered before the Lord your God and be delivered from your enemies." From this verse we learn it is a mitzvah to plead fervently with God through prayer and teruah (shofar blasts) whenever the community is faced with great distress... for it is a mitzvah to affirm in moments of distress our belief that the Holy One listens to prayers and intervenes to grant aid. (Nachmanides' commentary to Maimonides' Sefer Hamitzvot, Positive Commandment #5) B. Judaism, in contradistinction to mystical quietism, which recommended toleration of pain, wants man to cry out aloud against any kind of pain, to react indignantly to all kinds of injustice or unfairness. For Judaism held that the individual who displays indifference to pain and suffering, who meekly reconciles himself to the ugly, disproportionate and unjust in life, is not capable of appreciating beauty and goodness. Whoever permits his legitimate needs to go unsatisfied will never be sympathetic to the

crying needs of others. A human morality based on love and friendship, on sharing in the travail of others cannot be practiced if the person's own need-awareness is dull... Therefore, prayer in Judaism, unlike the prayer of classical mysticism, is bound up with the human needs, wants, drives, and urges, which make man suffer. Prayer is the doctrine of human needs. Prayer tells the individual, as well as the community, what his, or its, genuine needs are, what he should, or should not, petition God about... God needs neither thanks nor hymns. He wants to hear the outcry of man, confronted with a ruthless reality. He expects prayer to rise for a suffering world cognizant of its genuine needs. In short, through prayer man finds himself. Prayer enlightens man about his needs. It tells man the story of his hidden hopes and expectations. It teaches him how to behold the vision and how to strive in order to realize this vision, when to be satisfied with what one possesses, when to reach out for more. In a word, man finds his need-awareness, himself, in prayer. Of course, the very instant he finds himself, he becomes a redeemed being. (Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik) C. Prayer is an act of self-purification, a quarantine for the soul. It gives us the opportunity to be honest, to say what we believe, and to stand for what we say. However, prayer is no panacea, no substitute for action. It is, rather, like a beam thrown from a flashlight before us into the darkness. It is in this light that we grope, stumble, and climb, discover where we stand, what surrounds us, and the course which we should choose. Prayer is our attachment to the utmost. Without God in sight, we are like the scattered rungs of a broken ladder. To pray is to become a ladder on which thoughts mount to God to join the movement toward Him, which surges unnoticed, throughout the entire universe. We do not step out of world when we pray; we merely see the world in a different setting. The self is not the hub, but the spoke of the revolving wheel. In prayer we shift the center of living from self-consciousness to self-surrender. God is the center toward which all forces tend. He is the source, and we are the flowing of His force, the ebb and flow of His tides. (Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel) D. In its original form, prayer is not asking God for anything; it is not a request. It is a cry; an elementary outburst of woe, a spontaneous call in need; a hurt, a sorrow, given voice. It is the call of human helplessness directed to God. It is not asking, but coming with one's burden before God. It is like the child's running to the mother because it hurts. It is not the bandage that the child seeks instinctively but the nearness of the mother, to unburden his heart to the one of whose love he is certain. So the human being brings his sorrow before God: look, O God, what has been done to me, consider what has become of meà.To pray means to make God the confidant of one's sorrow and need. The asking and begging are natural enough, but they are of secondary importance. Decisive is the pouring out of the heart because one has to; the pouring out of the heart before God because He is the nearest, because He is the closest, because He is the natural confidant of the human soul. (Rabbi Eliezer Berkowitz in "Studies in Torah Judaism") E. Prayer serves admirably to articulate man's ideals, to make them conscious of the goals, which they profess, and to strengthen their

determination to attain them. A study of the prayers in any of the great liturgies will reveal this emphasis upon fundamental ideals of human conduct and aspiration. The function of prayer, as of ritual generally, is to make them conscious ideals such as these perpetually in the forefront of our consciousness. Unlike the multiplication table or a chemical equation which needs to be learned only once, the ideals of conduct, both personal and collective, are perpetually threatened by inundating tides of selfishness, ignorance, and shortsightedness. The exercise of prayer can keep these ideals vividly alive (Rabbi Robert Gordis in "A Faith for Moderns") For discussion: Nachmanides says that one is only required to pray when one feels compelled to do so, during some time of need, using one's own words and format. Prayer for Nachmanides is at its essence a plea for mercy and support during moments of concern and necessity. Modern thinkers offer other explanations for petitionary prayer. They help us answer the question: Why ask God for anything? Surely God is omniscient and knows everything about us. Why should God have to be informed about our troubles? How do you answer these questions? Do any of the above commentators offer you a direction?

PARASHAT SH'LAH L'CHA June 28, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Num. 13:1 - 15:41 (Hertz, p. 623; Etz Hayim, p. 840) Triennial Cycle II: Num. 14:8 - 15:7 (Hertz, p. 626; Etz Hayim, p. 845) Haftarah: Joshua 2:1 - 24 (Hertz, p. 635; Etz Hayim, p. 856) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Forgiveness "And the Lord said to Moses, 'How long will this people spurn Me, and how long will they have no faith in Me despite all the signs that I have performed in their midst? I will strike them with pestilence and disown them, and I will make of you a nation far more numerous than they.' But Moses said to the Lord. 'Therefore, I pray, let my Lord's forbearance be great, as You have declared, saying, 'The Lord, slow to anger and abounding in kindness; forgiving iniquity and transgression; yet not remitting all punishment, but visiting the iniquity of fathers upon children, upon the third and fourth generations.' Pardon, I pray, the iniquity of this people according to Your great kindness, as You have forgiven this people ever since Egypt.' And the Lord said, 'I pardon, as you have asked.'" (Numbers 14:11-20) Commentary A. "To walk in God's ways" (Deuteronomy 11:22). These are the ways of the Holy One: "gracious and compassionate, patient, abounding in kindness and faithfulness, assuring love for a thousand generations, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin, and granting pardon." (Exodus 34:6). This means that just as God is gracious, compassionate, and forgiving, you too must be gracious, compassionate, and forgiving. (Sifre - Devarim, Ekev) B. If you have done your fellow a slight wrong, let it be a serious matter in your eyes; but if you have done your fellow much good, let it be a trifle in your eyes. And if your fellow has done you a slight favor, let it be a great thing in your eyes; if your fellow has done you a great evil, let it be a little thing in your eyes. (Avot D'Rabbi Natan, Chapter 41) C. Forgive your neighbor the wrong he has done you, and then your sins will be pardoned when you pray. Does anyone harbor anger against another, and expect healing from the Lord? If one has no mercy toward another like himself, can he then seek pardon for his own sins? (Ben Sira 28:2-4) D. What if someone hurts you and begs forgiveness, but you just don't want to give it? Perhaps you think their plea is not fully sincere, you are still hurting too much, or maybe you just want to inflict a little suffering on the

person who hurt you. But there is a pragmatic reason for readily granting forgiveness; it is one of those acts for which Jewish tradition promises a generous and unique reward from God: "Rabba said Whose sin is forgiven? The sin of him who forgives sins committed against himself or herself" (Megillah 28a). In other words, if you are merciful to those who offend you, then God will be merciful to you when you offend Him. I understand this talmudic teaching as a kind of divine common sense. If you are unforgiving to those who have offended you, then you forfeit the right to ask God to treat you with the mercy that you are unwilling to extend to others. Conversely, if you are compassionate, that entitles you to a greater portion of God's compassion. (But what if you are too angry to forgive?) Then you should work on yourself. Try to enter into the other person's mind and imagine why she might have acted as she did. Did she deceive you in business? Perhaps she felt under such financial pressure that she didn't think clearly or fairly. Did he betray a secret? Maybe he told others out of a desperate need to seem important. (Joseph Telushkin, "The Book of Jewish Values") E. It is forbidden for a person to be cruel and not forgive. Rather one should be easy to pacify and hard to arouse to anger. And when the offending party comes to ask forgiveness, one should grant forgiveness with a full heart and in good spirit. And even if the person caused great pain or repeatedly caused offense, one should not take vengeance. For that is not becoming of the Jewish people. (Maimonides Laws of Repentance 2:10) F. "Master of the Universe, I hereby forgive anyone who angered or antagonized me or who sinned against me-whether against my body, my property, my honor, or against anything of mine; whether he did so accidentally, willfully, carelessly, or purposely; whether through speech, deed, thought, or notion; whether in this transmigration or another transmigration. May no man be punished because of me. May it be your will, my God and the God of my forefathers, that I may sin no more. Whatever sins I have done before You, may You blot out in your abundant mercies, but not through suffering or bad illnesses. May the expressions of my mouth and the thoughts of my heart find favor before You, my Rock and my Redeemer". (Meditation before the bedtime Shema in Artscroll Prayerbook page 289) G. The embarrassing secret is that many of us are reluctant to forgive. We nurture grievances because that makes us feel morally superior. Withholding forgiveness gives us a sense of power, often power over someone who otherwise leaves us feeling powerless. The only power we have over them is the power to remain angry at them. At some level, we enjoy the role of being the long-suffering aggrieved party. The Book of Deuteronomy in the Bible makes a distinction between murder, which is to be punished severely, and accidental manslaughter, which is treated more leniently. But how do we know if a fatal injury was caused deliberately or accidentally? Deuteronomy says (Deuteronomy 4:42) if the person who caused the injury had not been feuding with the victim over the previous two or three days, we can assume it was an accident. Commenting on that verse, the sages of the Talmud offer a fascinating psychological insight. They say that the normal life span of a quarrel is

two or three days. If a person hurts or offends you, you are entitled to be upset with him for that long. (We are talking about routine arguments and misunderstandings here, not major offenses.) If the bitter feelings extend into a fourth day, it is because you are choosing to hold on to them. You are nursing the grievance, keeping it on artificial life support, instead of letting it die a natural death. (Harold Kushner in "How Good Do We Have to Be?) H. Not to forgive is to be imprisoned by the past, by old grievances that do not permit life to proceed with new business. Not to forgive is to yield oneself to another's control. If one does not forgive, then one is controlled by the other's initiatives, and is locked into a sequence of action, a response of outrage and revenge. The present is overwhelmed and devoured by the past. Those who do not forgive are those who are least capable of changing the circumstances of their lives. In this sense, forgiveness is a shrewd and practical strategy for a personàto pursue for forgiveness frees the forgiver. (Time magazine quoted in Dov Peretz Elkins' "Moments of Transcendence") Sparks for Reflection/Discussion Rabbi Harold Schulweiss once said that the purpose of prayer is not the adulation of God but the imitation of God. It isn't the admiration of God but the emulation of God's ways. That is concept behind the source from Sifre. Reconciliation is difficult. It requires heroism and sacrifice. What is it that prevents us from being more forgiving? Is it the emotional satisfaction in claiming the role of victim? Is it power? Is it a sense of moral superiority? How can we let go of that incessant need to judge others? How do we move out of the role of victim and see beyond their actions to the person who is acting? How do we give up our ideas of being better than others and see ourselves as equals and co-learners? How do we make sure that we don't cede all control to the one that offended us and allow him/her to trap us in the past?

PARASHAT KORAH July 5, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Num. 16:1 - 18:32 (Hertz, p. 639; Etz Hayim, p. 860) Triennial Cycle II: Num. 16:20 - 17:24 (Hertz, p. 641; Etz Hayim, p. 863) Haftarah: I Samuel 11:14 - 12:22 (Hertz, p. 649; Etz Hayim, p. 876) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: The Value and Validity of Debate "And the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, 'Stand back from this community that I may annihilate them in an instant.' And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 'Speak to the community and say: Withdraw from about the abodes of Korach, Datan, and Aviram.' Moses rose and went to Datan and Aviram, the elders of Israel following him. He addressed the community, saying, 'Move away from the tents of these wicked men and touch nothing that belongs to them, let you be wiped out for all their sins.' So they withdrew from about the abodes of Korach, Datan, and Aviram." (Numbers 16:20, 21, 23-27) Commentary A. Any dispute that is for the sake of Heaven will in the end yield results. And any dispute that is not for the sake of Heaven will in the end not yield results. What is a dispute for the sake of Heaven? This is the sort of dispute between Hillel and Shammai. And what is one that is not for the sake of Heaven? It is the dispute of Korach and all his party. (Avot 5:17) One day Rabbi Yochanan said to Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish (in a religious debate): Never con a con-man (a robber is an expert at robbery). So what good did you ever do for me? When I was a robber, people called me, 'my lord' (literally, rabbi) and now people call me 'my lord.' Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said to him: I'll tell you what good I've done for you. I brought you under the wings of the Presence of God. Rabbi Yochanan was offended and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish fell ill. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish died and Rabbi Yochanan was very distressed. The Rabbis said: Who will go and restore Rabbi Yochanan's spirits? Let Rabbi Eleazar ben Pedat go because his traditions are well honed. He went and took a seat before him. At every statement that Rabbi Yochanan made, he commented, 'There is a teaching that supports your view.' Rabbi Yochanan said to him: Do you think you are like the son of Lakisha (that you are a good substitute for him)? When I would state something, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish would raise questions against my position on twenty-four grounds, and I would find twenty-four solutions, and it naturally followed that the tradition was broadened, but you say to me merely, 'There is a teaching that supports your view.' Don't I know that what I say is sound? So he went on tearing his clothes and weeping,

'Where are you son of Lakisha, where are you son of Lakisha.' He cried until his mind turned from him. The Rabbis asked mercy for him and he died. (Bava Metziah 84a) B. Torah learning takes place only in community beginning with Talmud study, the companion in learning, and ascending upward to the life of the community as a whole. We test our thoughts against the views of others; otherwise we construct a private world, a self-fabricated prison. Second, we compare our way of taking things apart and putting them back together against the ways others do the same work, our ideas against theirs. In the learning community of Israel, we bear responsibility to one another for our views, and we owe one another not only a statement of what we think, but a clear explanation of why we think so. Not only that, but faced with a disagreement about our view, we bear the obligation to give the other reasons why we are right and the other is wrong. All learning involves contention: 'I think,' 'you think,' do not suffice. 'I think because,' 'you are wrong because' - these define the act of learning. Two contradictory positions cannot be right-not in the real world of lucid transactions. Without reason we resort to force, rewriting history by appeal to who controls the state. To the famous philosophical saying, 'I think therefore I am,' we may add, 'I argue, therefore I am Israel.' When you argue you accord to the other a serious hearing for ideas besides your own, and when you take the other seriously, the other person opens up and out to you. Argument not only forms an act of respect but a statement of trust. And community builds upon trust. In the end, we see that Rabbi Yochanan cannot survive in a world in which people agree with everything he says. He dies. And so does a community that abandons the ambition to argue and gives up on the notion that contending ideas form the nourishment of the social order. And so, all alone, do all those who insist on their opinion, without reasoned argument to sustain it. 'Well, anyhow, that's my opinion' forms the sentence of death. Without reason, holy Israel would perish. (Jacob Neusner in "Reason and the Learning Community of Israel, the Holy People") C. Rabbi Abba said in the name of Shmuel: For three years, Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel disputed. The former said: the law follows me. The latter said: the law follows me. A Divine Voice emerged and said: both these and those are the words of the living God, but the law accords with Beit Hillel. But given that both are the words of the living God, why did Beit Hillel merit for the law to go according to them? It is because those in Beit Hillel were congenial and humble and they would teach their own position and their opponents' position. And not only that, they would teach the words of Beit Shamai before teaching their own position. (Eruvin 13b) D. What is the significance of Beit Hillel's moral virtues in granting priority to Hillel's school over Shammai's? Humility is necessary to open them to hear the opponent's views to reach a better rational clarification of the truth which is achieved through discussion. Since the humble ones suspect that they might err, they will double check themselves. Thus humility becomes a cognitively fruitful trait associated with skeptical selfcriticism. Another possible explanation is that ethics are more important

for social peace. Hillel is a pursuer of peace like Aaron. Deciding in favor of Beit Hillel is less likely to lead to exclusion of the dissenters and the creation of sectarianism. Alternatively, Hillel's humility leads the people to accept their leadership more readily since they are not acting for selfinterest or arrogantly promoting their own greater wisdom. Additionally, humility opens one to reality, not only to the ideal, so that law can be modified and society can survive change more easily. Unlike Shammai who chased away the potential convert, Hillel is considerate of human needs that halachah must address, not only of the ideal it demands. Another possibility is that humility towards God means that the decisions will be less influenced by one's desire to be right and more by the desire to please God which is, after all, the purpose of determining the law. Finally, humility is a religious value that may even be more important than the fidelity to the logic of the text. After all, it is service of God and realizing a religious way of life-not merely obeying the rules-that is the goal of Judaism. (Noam Zion based on Avi Sagi's "Eilu v'Eilu") Sparks for Reflection/Discussion As we see from the source in Pirkei Avot, Korach's attack on Moses is considered the paradigmatic dispute "not for the sake of Heaven." The latter source, however, does not provide a reason. The sources that follow the one from Avot may suggest some possible answers. Certainly it was not simply that Korach engaged in dispute, for debate is looked upon favorably in our tradition. Rabbi Yochanan, for example, eventually died from despair because he lacked a "chevruta," a partner, to debate him. The Talmud in Kiddushin 30b states that even a parent and child or a teacher and student should debate as vigorously as enemies; in the end, if the debate is over a matter of substance, they will emerge with great affection for one another. Based on the sources above, including Neusner who states that debate is a mechanism for creating community and Noam Zion who provides reasons why Hillel's position was accepted, what qualities did Korach lack or what rules of debate did he ignore? What made his dispute "not for the sake of Heaven?"

PARASHAT HUKKAT-BALAK July 12, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Num. 19:1 - 25:9 (Hertz, p. 652; Etz Hayim, p. 880) Triennial Cycle II: Num. 21:21 - 22:38 (Hertz, p. 662; Etz Hayim, p. 891) Haftarah: Micah 5:6 - 6:8 (Hertz, p. 682; Etz Hayim, p. 914) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Donkeys Talking? Then the Lord opened the donkey's mouth, and she said to Bilam, 'What have I done to you that you have beaten me these three times?' Bilam said to the donkey, 'You have made a mockery of me! If I had a sword with me, I'd kill you.' The donkey said to Bilam, 'Look, I am the donkey that you have been riding all along until this day! Have I been in the habit of doing thus to you?' And he answered, 'No.'" (Numbers 22:28-30) Commentary A. Now the serpent was the shrewdest of all the wild beasts that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say: You shall not eat of any tree of the garden?" (Genesis 3:1) The serpent is the evil prompter. (Bava Batra 16a) B. Although he is small in appearance, he does much damage. The Torah describes things figuratively by various names which are similar to them, just as a king is called 'lion' as it says 'A lion is gone up from his thicket' (Jeremiah 4:7), or enemies who do harm, 'serpents, adders,' as it says, 'For behold I will send serpents, adders, among you which will not be charmed' (Jeremiah 8:17). (Just as a lion is used by the prophet to represent Nebuchadnezzar and adders to represent the enemies of Israel, so the serpent represents Satan and the evil inclination which is within the human being leading him astray.) In this manner the evil inclination which tempts man is called 'serpent,' for he is similar to a serpent, which is an animal with limited utility but great potential to do harm though small in appearance. Our Sages have told us that Samael (the accuser; Angel of Death) rode on the serpent meaning that the power of lust, bringing to sin, accomplishes its end through the medium of the power of imagination which brings to man visions of physical, material pleasures, which lead him astray from the way of perfection intended by God. (Sforno on Genesis 3:1) C. Rav Saadia Gaon stated, now that it has become clear to us, that the ability to speak and think was given over only to human beings. Thus, we must say that the serpent and the donkey did not, in fact, speak. Rather, an angel spoke for them. But it seems to me that we should take the words of the Torah literally. Namely, the serpent did speak, and it walked

D.

E.

F.

G.

H.

upright. And the One that gave human beings the ability to think, gave the serpent and donkey that power too. And the verse (3:1) attests to this in that it states that the serpent was "arum" (shrewdest) of all the wild beasts, a comparison made relative to the animals not the humans. And the word "arum" means wise. (Ibn Ezra on Genesis 3:1) The truth is that the donkey did speak. And if you understand the mystery of the angels that appeared to Abraham as people and the mystery of the angels who appeared to Jacob as people, then you will understand the miracle of the donkey, namely, that God can cause a human being to see angels as people and can cause other supernatural phenomena such as a talking donkey. (Ibn Ezra on Numbers 22:28) God gave the donkey the power to speak just as we pray, "May the Lord open my lips and mouth to utter praises" (Psalms 51:17). All of this was meant to arouse Bilam to do teshuva, to repent, and be reminded that "from the Lord comes the utterances of the tongue" (Proverbs 16:1), even to one who is unprepared. How much more so that God can remove this power according to His will from one who is prepared. Now all this happened so that a man such as he not be destroyed (i.e. God was concerned for Bilam's welfare and did not want him to bring calamity on himself; apparently, Bilam was a man of great spiritual powers which were sadly channeled improperly, but nonetheless, it would have been tragic for such a person to be destroyed despite the fact that such potential was squandered). (Sforno on Numbers 22:28) Ten things were created on the eve of the Sabbath at twilight, and these are they: the mouth of the earth, the mouth of the well, the mouth of the donkey. (Avot 5:6) Since the law of nature was established by God, it was God's wish that it not be interfered with under any circumstance. But since God foresaw certain emergencies in the history of His people that would require special intervention in the normal operation of nature, God made provisions for them at the final completion of creation before the nightfall, which ushered in the first Sabbath. (Maimonides on Avot 5:6) It is, however, possible that God who gave the donkey the power of speech, also bestowed upon her an additional power of vision, so that she saw the likeness of a human being, although Scripture does not mention it. Thus God opened the eyes of the donkey and she indeed saw the angel, just as Scripture mentions later in regard to her master, "And the Eternal opened the eyes of Bilam, and he saw the angel of the Eternal" (28:31). For the whole matter of the donkey was a great miracle, being a new creation like those that were created at twilight on the eve of the first Sabbath, and it is not merely called "an opening of eyes." However, our Rabbis have only mentioned among the miracles the opening of the mouth of the donkey although the whole matter-and especially her seeing the angel-was miraculous in nature. The reason for this miracle was to show Bilam "Who has made man's mouth or who makes a man mute" (Exodus 4:11), and since God can make the mute speak, how much more so can God can make the mute speak, how much more so can God make mute at His will the mouth of tho se who can speak, and can also put words into their mouths, so that they speak in accordance with His will, for everything is in His power. It was thus a

warning to Bilam not to follow enchantments and soothsaying, and not to curse Israel thereby, because he was primarily an enchanter and soothsayer.(Nachmanides on Numbers 22:28) I. The donkey talking was an event that he saw in a dream as if God had opened the mouth of the donkey to cause it to speak. (Levi ben Gershon (Ralbag) on Numbers 22:28) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion How do we deal with talking donkeys and serpents in the Bible? Assuming the constancy of nature that the flowers bloom today as they bloomed thousands of years ago, and that animals today walk and communicate the way they did thousands of years ago, why do we not have talking snakes and donkeys today? Which of the above explanations sits best with you? Did all of this happen in a dream? Was there a Divine ventriloquist at work? Are these stories allegories?

PARASHAT PINHAS July 19, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Num. 25:10 - 30:1 (Hertz, p. 686; Etz Hayim, p. 918) Triennial Cycle II: Num. 26:52 - 28:15 (Hertz, p. 690; Etz Hayim, p. 924) Haftarah: Jeremiah 1:1 - 2:23 (Hertz, p. 710; Etz Hayim, p. 968) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Q & A - An Age-Old Jewish Technique The daughters of Tzelophechad came forward. They stood before Moses, Eleazar the priest, the chieftains, and the whole assembly, at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, and they said, 'Our father died in the wilderness. He was not one of the faction, Korach's faction, which banded together against the Lord, but died for his own sin; and he has left no sons. Let not our father's name be lost to his clan just because he had no son! Give us a holding among our father's kinsmen!' Moses brought the case before the Lord. And the Lord said to Moses, 'The plea of Tzelophechad's daughters is just; you should give them a hereditary holding among their father's kinsmen; transfer their father's share to them. (Numbers 27:1-7) Commentary A. By his example, Moses taught the heads of the Sanhedrin of Israel that were destined to arise after him, that they should not be embarrassed to ask for assistance in cases too difficult for them. For even Moses, who was Master of Israel, had to say, 'I have not understood.' Therefore Moses brought their cases before the Lord. (Targum Yonatan) B. This is one of the four legal cases that came up before Moses our master. In two of them Moses was quick to act and in two of them Moses was tardy. In each case Moses said: I have not heard the like. He was quick to act in the case of the unclean person who could not keep the passover at is appointed time (Numbers 9:6-13) and in the case of the daughters of Tselophechad (27:1-11; 36:1-12) because civil cases were involved. But in the case of the wood gatherer who profaned the Sabbath willfully and in the case of the blasphemer who pronounced the holy Name blasphemously (Leviticus 24:10-23), Moses was tardy because these were capital cases. This was in order to teach the judges who would succeed Moses that they should be quick in civil cases and tardy in capital cases, so that they would not be in a hurry to put to death even one condemned to death. (Targum Neofiti) C. But there are some men who were unclean by reason of a corpse and could not offer the passover sacrifice on that day. Appearing that same day before Moses and Aaron, those men said to them, "Unclean though we are by reason of a corpse, why must we be debarred from presenting

D.

E.

F.

G.

the Lord's offering at its set time with the rest of the Israelites?" Moses said to them, "Stand by, and let me hear what instructions the Lord gives about you." And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people, saying: When any of you or of your posterity who are defiled by a corpse or are on a long journey would offer a passover sacrifice to the Lord, they shall offer it in the second month, on the fourteenth day of the month, at twilight. They shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs, and they shall not leave any of it over until morning. (Numbers 9:6-12) There came out among the Israelites one whose mother was Israelite and whose father was Egyptian. And a fight broke out in the camp between that half-Israelite and a certain Israelite. The son of the Israelite woman pronounced the Name in blasphemy, and he was brought to Mosesàand he was placed in custody until the decision of the Lord should be made clear to them. (Numbers 24:10-12) There were three other things equally difficult that Moses could comprehend only after God made him to see them plainly. They were the compounding the holy anointing oil, the construction of the candlestick in the Tabernacle, and the animals the flesh of which is permitted or prohibited. Also the determination of the new moon was the subject of a special Divine teaching. (Louis Ginsberg in Legends of the Jews) In the Mishnah, the four "questions" are attributed to the parent who teaches the son: "Look how different this night is" The four questions become four curious behaviors that ought to arouse wonder, for amazement is the beginning of the search for knowledge. The parent must know how to "open up" the youngest child who doesn't even know how to forumlate questions. For example, "Listen dear, let's look around and see what surprises are planned for us during tonight's meal." Hopefully, the child will not only respond with that "Aha" experience of eyes opened wide, but also add his own comments to the parent's four. Under no circumstances should this be merely a ritualized recitation of questions by the parent or the young child. In fact, the "four questions" are not obligatory at all. As a medieval Spanish rabbi explained (Haggadah, Meam Loez, page 234-236 Hebrew Edition): "It is a mitzvah to tell the story of the exodus from Egypt by arousing one's mind and heart and drawing the things out of us. All present at the seder should ask their parent or anyone sitting beside them at the table to explain the reason for each and every thing. Even if one is alone at home and knows all the reasons, one should conduct a discussion with oneself, asking and answering one's own questions." (Noam Zion and David Dishon, A Different Night, Leader's Guide) Why were the Rabbis so insistent that the Exodus story open with spontaneous questions? First of all, one can view this as an educational device. Teachers know that if they can just get their students to pay attention, get their minds working on something they find interesting, then teachers have gone a long way towards creating an openness to learning new things. The R abbis wanted to remind the leaders of the seder not just to focus on the story-but first to make sure to have an active, attentive audience. On a deeper level, the Rabbis may have reflected that questioning is an essential part of the freedom celebrated on the

seder night. The whole Talmudic literature is in the form of questioning and dialogue-not the meek questioning of inferior to superior but the give-and-take interaction of adamant rivals pitted against one another, and sometimes even against God! (see Bava Metzia 59b). An essential characteristic of free people is that they notice the world around them, make distinctions and search for meaningful patterns. They want understanding, not inscrutability. For a slave mentality, nothing is "different" - all tasks are part of the same meaningless arbitrariness. There is no point in asking if no one answers, no place for questions in a world where the master's arbitrary orders are the ultimate justification for the way things are. In beginning the seder with genuine (not rote) questions, the Rabbis show that we not only tell the story of freedom, but we act like free people. (Noam Zion and David Dishon, A Different Night) H. My years in the rabinnate taught me to seek ways of talking about Judaism that would be meaningful to Jews of various backgrounds. Although I had been an Orthodox rabbi in the Bronx and in Montreal for seventeen years, my congregations were made up of people of many different backgrounds and levels of observance and belief. During my rabbinnic training at Yeshivah University, Iwas taught to answer halakhic questions. The details of the laws of kashrut and similar mitzvot were studied with rigor and devotion. Upon entering the rabbinate, I was anxious to answer the great halakhic questions of the Jewish community. I waited with anticipation, but to my dismay there were no questioners. Finally I realized that the role of the rabbi was not so much to provide answers as to create questions. (David Hartman, A Heart of Many Rooms) I. The Talmud, the greatest of all rabbinic works, is distinguished, above all, by its commitment to questions and challenges. The Mishnah gives the law; the Talmud asks, "why?" "For what reason?" "Maybe there's an alternative?" These questions challenge even God and God's law (the Torah). We are a people of questions. By continuing to ask questions, we guarantee our freedom. (David Kraemer, JTSA) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion Why is the question so sacred in Judaism? Abraham Joshua Heschel once explained that the role of religious educators is to be the midwife to the birth of a question, for Judaism a response to life's deepest questions. How do we foster an environment that values the question, provokes curiosity, legitimates debate, or validates challenging even our most sacred beliefs? How do we do that in a respectful way? To what extent should there be religious "authority" in our modern faith? Is everything open to question? What isn't?

PARASHAT MATTOT-MAS'EI July 26, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Num. 30:2 - 36:13 (Hertz, p. 702; Etz Hayim, p. 941) Triennial Cycle II: Num. 32:1 - 33:49 (Hertz, p. 707; Etz Hayim, p. 949) Haftarah: Jeremiah 2:4-38; Jer. 3:4; Jer. 4:1-2 (Hertz, p. 725) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Dwelling in Israel "The Reubenites and the Gadites owned cattle in very great numbers. Noting that the lands of Jazer and Gilead were a region suitable for cattle, the Gadites and the Reubenites came to Moses, Eleazar the priest, and the chieftains of the community, and said, 'the land that the Lord has conquered for the community of Israel is cattle country, and your servants have cattle. It would be a favor to us,' they continued, 'if this land were given to your servants as a holding; do not move us across the Jordan.'" (Numbers 32:1-5) Commentary A. In the steppes of Moab, at the Jordan near Jericho, the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to them: When you cross the Jordan into the land of Canaan, you shall dispossess all the inhabitants of the land. You shall apportion the land among yourselves by lot, clan by clan: with larger groups increase the share, with smaller groups reduce the share. Wherever the lot falls for anyone, that shall be his. You shall have your portions according to your ancestral tribes. (Numbers 33:50-54) In my opinion Numbers 33:50-54 constitute a positive commandment of the Torah wherein God commanded them to settle in the land and inherit it; for God gave it to them; and they should not reject the heritage of the Lord. (Nachmanides on Numbers 33:53) B. Rabbi Simlai expounded: Why did Moses our teacher yearn to enter the land of Israel? Did he want to eat of its fruits or satisfy himself from its bounty? But thus said Moses: 'Many mitzvot were commanded to Israel that can only be fulfilled in Eretz Yisrael. I wish to enter the land so that they may all be fulfilled by me.' (Sotah 14a) C. Both husbands and wives may force their spouses to make aliyah. (Mishnah Ketubot 13:11) D. It is forbidden to leave Eretz Yisrael unless two 'seah' of wheat sell for one 'selah.' Rabbi Shimon said, if one can find any wheat at all, even if one 'se'ah' costs a 'selah,' he should not emigrate. (Bava Batra 91a) E. Whoever moves to Israel for the sake of heaven and conducts himself in holiness and purity, there is no end to his reward, provided that he can support himself there. (Meir of Rothenburg, Germany, 1215-1293)

F. Since there is danger involved and since it is hard to earn a living there, every person should judge his physical and monetary capabilities if he will be able to fear Heaven and observe mitzvot in Israel. (Israel Isserlein, Austria, 1390-1460) G. Rabbi Moses Feinstein, Iggrot Mosheh, Even ha-Ezer, I (102), distinguishes between two distinct categories of positive commandments. There are precepts whose performance is mandatory, e.g., circumcision, the donning of tefillin, etc., and others which are not mandated as obligatory responsibilities but nevertheless, when indeed performed, constitute the fulfillment of a commandment. Rabbi Feinstein maintains that even according to Nachmanides residence in Eretz Yisrael is not obligatory because this commandment is not a mandatory one. According to this interpretation, Nachmanides' position is that the act of dwelling in Israel constitutes voluntary fulfillment of a commandment rather than the discharge of an obligation. Dissenting sharply, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef asserts that the commandment constitutes a mandatory obligation, and that even in our own day there exists "a definite obligation upon all who fear the word of God and His commandments to ascend to the Land of Israel." (J. David Bleich, Contemporary Halakhic Problems) There are various approaches including those who say it is a mitzvah to make aliyah, those who say living in Israel merely enables one to observe more mitzvot, those who discourage emigration, those who say that one must be pragmatic and determine if one can make a living and observe mitzvot, and even those who say (Rabbi Judah in Ketubot 110b111a) that if one leaves Babylonia to make aliyah it is a sin. But the thrust of Numbers 33:53 as well as of the entire Bible and Talmud is that all Jews are supposed to live in Eretz Yisrael. That is what God repeatedly promised our ancestors, that is why God redeemed us from Egypt, and that is where a large percentage of the mitzvot need to be observed. (David Golinkin, Dean of the Israeli Conservative Rabbinical School) H. This concerns the intelligent young man, Reb Mordecai, the Ashkenazi who came from Germany, having left his father and mother and his birthplace, to settle in the Holy Land, the glory of Israel, in Safed. Now he cannot get settled for he does not find peace alone, and he cannot find a wife. Therefore, his health is impaired. He asks us whether he is permitted by Jewish law to leave Palestine; for he fears he might fall into sin by remaining unmarried. Now, with the mercy of God, I will answer. Maimonides states that a man is permitted to leave Palestine to marry, to study Torah, and to avoid famine in the land. But the journey must only be temporary. When the permitted purposes are achieved or their realization attempted to the utmost of one's ability, the traveler must return to Palestine. Now this Mordecai, since he is going to marry, is of course permitted to go. Yet this is permitted so far as it seems from the above sources that this is conditional, namely, he must return after he marries unless his wife's parents make the premarriage condition with him that he shall not take her out of her native land. Then he is naturally free of the obligation to return because he could not find a wife unless he accepted the condition of remaining there. In fact, after going more

deeply into the matter, it seems just ified to say that the opinion of the tosefot and Maimonides, that an emigrant must return, applies only to one whose dwelling place and that of his fathers has been in Palestine. Such a person is forbidden to leave, excepting only to marry; and hemust then return. But this man, Mordecai, who came from a distant land to the Holy Land, had intended to find here a wife and a home. Now, since he could not get settled here, then his very coming to Palestine was based upon a condition that was not fulfilled. Indeed, the intention of Maimonides was to defend those who dwell outside of Palestine. Our teacher did not think it right to say that whoever dwells outside of Palestine was as if he has no God (as the Talmud says). That is why he wrote that the meaning of the Talmud, which says that a man should always live in Palestine and not outside of it, does not refer to those whose ancestors for generations dwelt outside, after being exiled from the Holy Land at God's decree. Evidently, then says Maimonides, when the Talmud says that no one shall dwell outside Palestine, it means that no one shall leave Palestine to dwell outside. That is why the Talmud specifically says, "whoever leaves Palestine, it is as if he worships idols." My general conclusion is that this Reb Mordecai is permitted to go outside of Palestine to marry. (Responsum of Rabbi Yom Tov Zahalon, rabbi of Safed, born 1557) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion The above sources present a wide range of opinions on whether or not making aliyah is obligatory. Some Jewish movements have put aliyah at the top of their religious agenda and encourage American Jews, for example, to move to Israel. Other movements are more ambivalent. What should the Conservative Movement's stance be? How imperative should it be in our principles? In our practice as Jews? How should we relate to the prayers that we recite regularly in our Services that speak of our "return to Israel"?

PARASHAT D'VARIM August 2, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Deuteronomy 1:1-3:22 (Hertz, p. 735; Etz Hayim, p. 980) Triennial Cycle 2: Deuteronomy 2:2-30 (Hertz, p. 743; Etz Hayim, p. 990) Haftarah: Isaiah 1:1-27 (Hertz, p. 750; Etz Hayim, p. 999) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Strength and Heroism Then the Lord said to me: You have been skirting this hill country long enough; now turn north. And charge the people as follows: You will be passing through the territory of your kinsmen, the descendants of Esau, who live in Seir. Though they will be afraid of you, be very careful not to provoke them. For I will not give you of their land so much as a foot can tread on; I have given the hill country of Seir as a possession to Esau. What food you eat you shall obtain from them for money; even the water you drink you shall procure from them for money. Indeed, the Lord your God has blessed you in all your undertakings. He has watched over your wanderings through this great wilderness; the Lord your God has been with you these past forty years: you have lacked nothing. We then moved on, away from our kinsmen, the descendants of Esau, who live in Seir, away from the road of the Arabah, away from Elath and Ezion-geber; and we marched on in the direction of the wilderness of Moab. And the Lord said to me: Do not harass the Moabites or provoke them to war. For I will not give you any of their land as a possession; I have assigned Ar as a possession to the descendants of Lot. When all the warriors among the people died off, the Lord spoke to me saying: You are now passing through the territory of Moab, through Ar. You will then be close to the Ammonites; do not harass them or start a fight with them. For I will not give any part of the land of the Ammonites to you as a possession; I have assigned it as a possession to the descendants of Lot. (Deut. 2:2-9, 16-19) Commentary A. "Though they will be afraid of you, be very careful." In what way should they be careful? Do not provoke them. (Rashi on 2:4-5) B. The new generation, full of strength and vigor had to learn to practice self-control and curb their own aggressiveness aroused by the very fear displayed by the weaker neighbor. No advantage should be taken, but "What food you eat you shall obtain from them for money; even the water you drink you shall procure from them for money." (Nechama Leibowitz, Studies in D'varim, Parashat D'varim) C. Ben Zoma says: Who is mighty? He who conquers one's passions, as it is said in Proverbs 16:32: One who is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and one who rules over one's spirit is better than one who

conquers a city. (Pirkei Avot 4:1) D. The mighty individual is the one who conquers one's passions; not the one who is blessed with a good physique, rather one who is able to overcome whatever instinctual drives might incline the individual towards undesirable forms of behavior. Whether it be wisdom, might, wealth, or one's honored station in life, all of these are active processes; one must continuously learn, one must continuously fight against one's own inner inclinations, one must continually have the attitude of satisfaction with what one has, and one must continually bestow honor on others. In this process, we gain fulfillment of the values of wisdom, might, wealth, and honor. (Reuven Bulka in Chapters of the Sages: A Psychological Commentary on Pirkey Avoth) E. Being courageous in Judaism does not mean acting Rambo-like in destroying enemies from without. Rather, the person who is able to destroy an inner enemy and overcome temptation is the true Jewish hero. This is the meaning of the Mishnah (Avot 4:1) that defines a courageous person as he who can overcome his desires. These were the same words that were used by the rabbis (Tamid 32a) to Alexander the Great, arguably the most courageous man alive at that time (in nonJewish terms). They told him that true courage is shown by overcoming one's inner desires; by defeating oneself. The Talmud (Megillah 16b) proves this idea from a verse (Isaiah 28:6) demonstrating that true strength actually means self-control. (Nachum Amsel, The Encyclopedia of Moral and Ethical Issues) F. The greatest struggle in your life is not with society; it is with yourself. This idea is not taught in America today. We are taught that we are victims of a society that is sexist, racist, anti-Semitic, anti-Asian, antiHispanic, anti-woman, anti-old, anti-young-anti- just about everyone. The temptation is therefore overwhelming to see your problems and challenges in life as being with America and not with yourself. Please understand: In this society, my greatest challenge is Dennis; your greatest challenge is you. And if you can make you better, you will make this society better. Please don't buy the rhetoric that the external is the problem. In a free and affluent country like this, we are the problem. (Dennis Prager, The Prager Perspective, May 1, 1997) G. Whereas the classical hero advances in battle to defeat his enemy, the Biblical hero retreats from conflict with his fellow man. Whereas the classical hero battles monsters and dragons, the biblical hero battles his own inner demons. Whereas the classical hero seeks to become "a god," the biblical hero teaches all men to know the one true G-d. The Knights of the Round Table are born for adventure. But the Biblical knight of faith is born for service. And whereas the classical hero is wrapped in splendor draped in glory, the biblical hero is naked and innocent before G-d. Religion replaced honor with humility, hatred with harmony, mortal conquest with moral courage, and a passion for publicity with a desire for the divine countenance. In the process a new definition of heroism was born. Our ancient Rabbis proclaimed, "Who is a hero? He who conquers his own selfish inclination." (Shmuely Boteach, Oxford Preacher of the Year)

Sparks for Reflection/Discussion God demands restraint of the Israelites three times as they travel towards the Promised Land. They are told to refrain from attacking the descendants of Esau, the Moabites, and the Ammonites. In other words, prior to waging waragainst the seven Canaanite nations, the Israelites were commanded to fight their internal inclination to attack certain other nations. Was this type of heroic restraint a precondition to inheriting the Land? How does Jewish law help cultivate this type of heroism?

PARASHAT VA'ET'HANAN August 9, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Deuteronomy 11:26-16:17 (Hertz, p. 755; Etz Hayim, p. 1005) Triennial Cycle 2: Deuteronomy 12:29-14:29 (Hertz, p. 765; Etz Hayim, p. 1015) Haftarah: Isaiah 54:11-55:5 (Hertz, p. 776; Etz Hayim, p. 1032) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Commandedness Honor your father and your mother, as the Lord your God commanded you, that you may long endure, and that you may fare well, in the land that the Lord your God is assigning to you. (Deut. 5:16) Commentary A. Rabbi Eliezer was asked: How far does the honor of parents extend? Said he: Go forth and see what a certain non-Jew, Dama, son of Netinah by name, did in Ashkelon. The Sages sought jewels for the ephod (breastplate for the high priest) at a profit of six hundred thousand golden dinari - but as the key was lying under his father's pillow, he did not trouble him. The following year the Holy Blessed One gave him his reward: A red heifer was born to him in his herd. When the Sages of Israel went to him to buy it he said to them: I know you, that even if I asked you for all the money in the world you would pay me, but I ask you only the money I lost through my father's honor. And Rabbi Chanina said: If this is the reward given to someone who is not commanded and acts, then imagine how much greater the reward would be for someone who IS commanded and acts. For Rabbi Chanina said: Greater is the one who is commanded and acts than the one who is not commanded and acts. (Kiddushin 31a) B. It seems that the reason that the one who is commanded and acts is preferable is because he worries and is concerned more lest he transgress the mitzvah versus the one who is not commanded and acts who has "bread in his basket," i.e. if he wants, he does not have to fulfill the mitzvah. (Tosafot Kiddushin 31a on "Greater is the one who is commanded and acts") C. He is greater because he is worried to fulfill the commandment of his creator. (Tosafot Avodah Zara 3a on "Greater is the one who is commanded and acts") D. Many reasons are given explaining why the one who acts out of a sense of command is greater. Tosafot in Kiddushin explains that the commanded person, since he knows that he is obligated to act, his inclination rebels and tries to get him not to do the commandment. On the other hand, the one who is not commanded, since he can take a

pass on doing the act at any time, he does not have to fight his rebellious nature. And there are those who wrote that since God did not command the latter to do the act, what pleasure does God derive from the person doing something he was not commanded to do? And in the name of the Ramban, it was written that the mitzvot are not commanded for God's benefit but for the human being's benefit and need to give people the opportunity to draw close to God through obedience to God's commandments. And for that reason, the one who is not commanded does nothing special. (Adin Steinsaltz Iyyunim Tractate Kiddushin 31a on "Greater is the one who is commanded and acts") E. We might find this logic perplexing, for we have been taught to believe that what is given freely is more desirable, more heartfelt, than what is given out of obligation or imperative. The problem with that logic, and the reason the rabbis came down on the side of obligation, was best expressed in the famous opening scene of "Fiddler on the Roof." After begging for alms and getting less than the week before, the petitioner sighs, "Because he had a bad week, I should suffer?" We can count on people who feel obligated to act on behalf of others, but people who do it out of the goodness of their hearts may not be there when doing good is inconvenient or gets in the way of competing desires. Aristotle commented much of what we call good character is rooted in habit and imposition. We cannot wait for people to be good; we must mandate it. "Virtue comes about, not by a process of nature, but by habituation." Being Jewish, doing Jewish, means behaving out of obligation, the obligation one's fellow, even when it is difficult to do. (Author Unknown) F. While motives and character assessment interest many secular moral thinkers, the true test of moral character is its reliability. And here, the religious character is often superior. As the ancient Talmudic dictum holds, "The person who is commanded and acts right is greater than the person who is not commanded and acts right." Why? Because the person who does good because he feels commanded is obeying a code that is greater than he is. Even if he does not feel like engaging in the act, he will do so. On the other hand, the individual who does not feel obligated to any outside command does good because he feels it is right and feels like doing so - and only then. In the final analysis, which individual is more morally reliable - the one who always does what he feels is right, or the one who acts in accordance with a moral code to which he feels obligated? With regard to credit and gratitude to anyone who does good in this world, if our greatest concern is that goodness increase and prevail, we cannot rely on those who answer only to themselves and to their consciences. When you have to answer only to yourself, it is all too easy to err and it is all too easy to rationalize away anything. (Dennis Prager, The Prager Perspective, February 15, 1998) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion We usually think that the volunteer deserves greater reward than the one who acts out of duty or obligation. Yet, the Talmud, in discussing the mitzvah of honoring parents, argues the opposite. It cites the example of a Roman nobleman named Dama ben Netina, someone not commanded to fulfill the

mitzvah of honoring parents but who was part of a culture that valued respect for parents in an exemplary manner. The Talmud uses that example as a foil and contrasts Dama's reward to that of someone who does the same good act but out of a sense of command. The Talmud asserts that the latter gains a greater reward. What is the logic behind this paradox? Why is Rabbi Chanina's statement so central to Judaism? How is it one of the defining attitudes that distinguish Judaism from American liberalism?

PARASHAT EKEV August 16, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Deuteronomy 7:12-11:25 (Hertz, p. 780; Etz Hayim, p. 1037) Triennial Cycle 2: Deuteronomy 9:4-10:11 (Hertz, p. 764; Etz Hayim, p. 1042) Haftarah: Isaiah 49:14-51:3 (Hertz, p. 795; Etz Hayim, p. 1055) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Holiness I started down the mountain, a mountain ablaze with fire, the two Tablets of the Covenant in my two hands. I saw how you had sinned against the Lord your God: you had made yourselves a molten calf; you had been quick to stray from the path that the Lord had enjoined upon you. Thereupon I gripped the two tablets and flung them away with both my hands, smashing them before your eyes. (Deut. 9:15-17) Commentary A. Breaking the tablets expresses Moses' rage. His act also has legal significance. In Mesopotamian law the cancellation of a contract is expressed by breaking the clay tablets on which it is written. This is the equivalent of ripping up legal documents written on tearable materials. By smashing the tablets, Moses indicated that the covenant was annulled because the people had violated one of its most fundamental conditions. Relations between God and Israel were severed. (Jeffrey Tigay, JPS Commentary, Deut. 9:17) B. The dazzled joy of the dancing exposes a hidden truth. One manner of expressing that truth is articulated by Sefath Emeth: the letters, the words of God, have left no deep imprint in their hearts. A deeper desire possesses them: for any object, any fetish, with which they can lose their self-consciousness, their entrapment in time. If Moses, as idealized object, has failed them, they turn to the Golden Calf in a reflexive motion towards an idiom of their time. For Moses, this moment is one of traumatic, retroactive understanding. The orgiastic release of the people's dancing tells him what his own role has been for them. This is the profound loneliness that leads him to smash the tablets. For he realizes that the fetishism that he is witnessing represents a fantasy in which he too figured. His loneliness is born of the distance between the person and the uses to which the persona is put. Moses, therefore, smashes the tablets, not in pique, but in a tragic realization that a people so hungry for absolute possession may make a fetish of the tablets as well. The whole narrative of redemption has now been pathologically restructured for him: the tablets of revelation take on the macabre lineaments of another idol. (Aviva Zornberg, The Particulars of Rapture)

C. Everything that is holy-the Land of Israel, Jerusalem, etc. - is more than an aspect of the Torah, and it is sanctified by the holiness of the Torah. Do not imagine that the Temple and the Sanctuary are holy in and of themselves, God forbid! God dwells amongst His people, and if they transgress His covenant, they (the Temple and the Sanctuary) are bereft of their holiness and become as profane objects. The tablets, bearing the writing of God, are also not holy in and of themselves; it is only for you that they are holy, and when the bride goes whoring from her canopy they become no more than pieces of clay; they are not holy in and of themselves, but only for you, if you keep the commandments engraved upon them In sum, there is nothing holy in the world. Only God is holy, and it is Him who is befitting of praise and worship. Holiness inheres in no created thing, except insofar as the people of Israel keeps the Torah in accordance with the will of the Creator. (Meshech Chochmah on Exodus 32:19) D. Holiness lies in keeping the commandments as it says in Deut. 28:9, "The Lord will establish you as His holy people." (Ibn Ezra on Deut. 28:9) E. The Land of Israel is the holiest land. And in what does its holiness consist? In that the omer and the first-fruits and the twin loaves are taken from it. (Kelayim 1:6) F. Holiness consists of doing God's command and can be ascribed neither to the subject who performs it nor to the objects that are the focus of its performance. The latter in and of them selves - like everything else in the world-are indifferent from a religious point of view. To raise them to the level of holiness is to make them divine, and that is as idolatrous as worship of the golden calf, itself. Nor does the calf necessarily have to be of gold: It can be of stone; it can be a place, a country, or a people, or even an idea or a particular personality. (Yeshayahu Leibowitz in Contemporary Religious Thought) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion Professor Tigay explores the legal significance of the smashing of the tablets. The other commentators cited above explain that the smashed tablets not only symbolize a broken covenant. The smashed tablets teach an important lesson; namely, a misapprehension of holiness can be a form of idolatry. Holiness is only an attribute of God, according to these sources. The Land of Israel, for example, as stated in Mishna Kelayim, is not intrinsically holy. It is sanctified by virtue of the omer and first fruits that are taken from it. "To see holiness as the essence of some object existing in the world of nature or of history is to raise that thing to the level of the divine-and that is idolatry," writes Yeshayahu Leibowitz. Where do we see examples of this type of idolatry in today's Jewish world?

PARASHAT RE'EH August 23, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Deuteronomy 11:26-16:17 (Hertz, p. 799; Etz Hayim, p. 1061) Triennial Cycle 2: Deuteronomy 12:29-14:29 (Hertz, p. 804; Etz Hayim, p. 1068) Haftarah: Isaiah 54:11-55:5 (Hertz, p. 818; Etz Hayim, p. 1085) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Putting Mourning Into Perspective You are children of the Lord your God. You shall not gash yourselves or shave the front of your heads because of the dead. For you are a people consecrated to the Lord your God; the Lord your God chose you from among all other peoples on earth to be His treasured people. (Deut. 14:1-2) Commentary A. Because you are children of the Eternal, it is becoming for you to be comely and not be cut about and bald due to the tearing out of hair. (Rashi on Deut. 14:1) B. Once you realize that you are children of the Eternal and that God loves you more than a father loves his child, you should not cut yourselves in bereavement for anything that God does, because whatever God has done is for your good although you may not understand it, just as little children do not understand their father, yet rely on him. "For you are a people consecrated to the Lord your God" and you are not like all the other nations; therefore, you shall not do as they do. (Ibn Ezra on Deut. 14:1) C. If your parent were to die, you should not gash yourselves or pull out your hair to inflict great pain upon yourself because you are not orphans despite the tragedy, for you have a great living eternal parents, namely the Holy Blessed One. The idolater, however, when his parent dies has no remaining parent that can help him in his hour of need for the father that remains for him is constructed out of wood and the mother that remains for him is made of stone - thus idolaters weep, gash themselves, and tear out their hair. (Chizkuni on Deut. 14:1) D. In Leviticus we already have remarked how the prohibition of incisions on one's body and making baldness on one's head as a sign of grief over death ensured the keeping of one's self-estimation, the consciousness of one's own worth arising from being directly belonging to God, even in comparison and in connection with our dearest and most honored personalities. No personality may chain us so closely to it, allow us to be so absorbed into it, that when it departs from us we may throw our own personality after it, as having no longer any value, as would be what the permanent sign of cut or baldness on our body is meant to express. Now

in the previous chapter the danger was described which even our highest relationship to God could be exposed to by unrestricted devotion to persons who infuse us with love and respect. A danger which would arise all the more easily in the isolation in which the people were now about to enter, small settlements and circles far away from the center, and people of imposing spirituality or in prominent positions would have much stronger influence. So that the Torah repeats with increased significance the prohibition against incisions and tearing out one's hair which wishes to keep up our own self-valuation even against our nearest and dearest, and brings the great idea home to all classes throughout the people that you are children of God, in the very first instance your nearest relation is your Father in heaven and you are His children. The tie that attaches you to your God is closer to, and comes before all other ties. (Samson Raphael Hirsch on Deut. 14:1) E. In my opinion the purport of the expression "for you are a people consecrated to the Lord your God" is to state an assurance of the eternal existence of the souls before the Holy Blessed One. The verse declares: Since you are a holy people and the treasure of God, neither does God respect any person but He devises means that he that is banished be not an outcast from Him" (II Samuel 14:14) - therefore it is improper for you to make incisions in your flesh and tear your hair for the dead even if "he perishes in youth" (Job 36:14). Scripture, however, did not prohibit weeping for the dead since it is natural to cry when parting from beloved ones, and when they go on a journey even in life. From this verse, there is support for our Rabbis in prohibiting excessive mourning for the dead. (Nachmanides on Deut. 14:1) F. Gashing the flesh until the blood runs and removing hair are known as mourning rites the world over. Some scholars think that they were believed to have an effect on the ghost of the dead person, either as offerings of blood and hair to strengthen the ghost in the nether world or to assuage the ghost's jealousy of the living by showing it how griefstricken they are. These rites could also be acts of self-punishment expressing feelings of guilt, which are often experienced by survivors after a death." (Jeffrey Tigay, JPS Commentary, on Deut. 14:1) G. One should not perform extreme rites of mourning when bereaved because, as God's children, one is never totally orphaned. (Abravanel on Deut. 14:1) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion The core of this Torah portion is a set of laws whose intent is to create a spiritual distance between the Israelites and their pagan neighbors. The Israelites are not only forbidden to engage in idolatry but also to incorporate elements of pagan worship into Israelite practice. The pagan sites of worship are to be destroyed, and all of Israelite worship of the One singular God is to be centralized in one singular location. Another way in which the Israelites distinguish themselves from their idolatrous neighbors is through the laws of mourning. Specifically, we are forbidden to disfigure ourselves when mourning. The question is why not? What is the connection between God as

parent/Israelites as children and the prohibition against gashing oneself? What values are expressed in this ancient law that guide mourning practices today?

PARASHAT SHOFTIM August 30, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Deuteronomy 16:18-21:9 (Hertz, p. 820; Etz Hayim, p. 1088) Triennial Cycle 2: Deuteronomy 18:6-19:13 (Hertz, p. 825; Etz Hayim, p. 1094) Haftarah: Isaiah 51:12-52:12 (Hertz, p. 835; Etz Hayim, p. 1107) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Capital Punishment - A Rorschach Test? If, however, a person who is the enemy of another lies in wait for him and sets upon him and strikes him a fatal blow and then flees to one of these towns, the elders of his town shall have him brought back from there and shall hand him over to the blood-avenger to be put to death; you must show him no pity. Thus you will purge Israel of the blood of the innocent, and it will go well with you. (Deut. 19:11-13) Commentary A. Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for in His image did God make man. (Genesis 9:6) B. He who fatally strikes a man shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:12) C. You may not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of a capital crime; he must be put to death. (Numbers 35:31) A Sanhedrin that executed one person in seven years is called murderous. Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria says once in seventy years. Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva say that if we had been on the Sanhedrin, no one would ever have been executed. Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel says that they would thereby multiply shedders of blood in Israel. (Mishnah Makkot 1:10) D. One who murders without clear proof that he is the murderer, i.e. there were not two witnesses, or without warning having been administered by two witnesses, the king has authority to execute him and to perfect the world in accordance with what the hour requires. The king is empowered to take the measures necessary to inspire fear, and to break the hands of the world's evil people. (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings 3:10) E. One who commits murder without witnesses is placed in a cell and fed with bread of adversity and waters of affliction. How do we know he committed the murder? Shmuel said: There were witnesses but they did not warn him. Rav Chisda said: He was convicted through witnesses who were disproved on the minor circumstances of the crime, but not on the vital points. The murderer is placed by the court in a cell and fed with barley bread until his stomach bursts. (Talmud Sanhedrin 81b) F. The Bible is quite explicit about the specific need for execution for the sake of retributive justice. The rabbis of the Talmud never rejected

execution as an inherently unjust punishment. Professor Moshe Greenberg suggests that talion for murder was indeed a moral step forward in the Near East. The death penalty prevented the rich person from buying him self or her self out of the crime. Actual cases of judicial execution in the Tanach and in the Second Commonwealth are quite rare. Moreover, the rabbis of the Talmud, who developed a legal system through interpretation of the Bible, imposed an array of restrictions on capital cases. These extraordinarily strict demands (two credible witnesses who had each forewarned the potential offender), meant to prevent mistaken identity, allow for a situation in which execution would have become very rare. We do not know how rare because the Romans eliminated capital punishment at least forty years before the Temple was destroyed and Jewish jurisprudence no longer had standing to impose the death penalty. (Elie Spitz "The Jewish Tradition and Capital Punishment") G. There are few areas in Jewish law where the biblical and talmudic view so conflict as in the matter of capital punishment. The dominant, although not exclusive, line of argument proffered in the Talmud opposes the death sentence, even in the case of premeditated murder. It places so many restrictions on the judicial authorities that very few, if any, murderers would be convicted were these restrictions enforced. A contemporary Orthodox legal scholar, Rabbi J. David Bleich, notes that, from the perspective of Jewish law, "fingerprints, forensic evidence and the like must be relegated to the category of circumstantial evidence" and thus are judicially worthless. The Talmud explains that they would have ensured that no death sentences were carried out by subjecting the witnesses to such searching cross-examination that, inevitably, there would be questions they couldn't answer. Akiva and Tarfon would have used the witnesses' inability to answer as the rationale for not sentencing the defendant to death (Talmud Makkot 7a). Gerald Blidstein has rightly noted that the "source of their opposition was not a fear of killing the innocent but a reluctance to kill the guilty." Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel's response, that Akiva and Tarfon's behavior would have caused an increase in murder, reflects, of course, the view that the death sentence is a deterrent. To me, it seems that the impossible range of restrictions the Rabbis placed on judicial authorities constituted a form of protest against Roman rule, for the Romans executed whomever they wanted, for whatever offense, based on the flimsiest evidence. (On the other hand), in times of emergency, these extreme precautionary measures could be suspended, a ruling subsequently incorporated into Maimonides's code (see "Laws of Kings" 3:10). Second, the Talmud ruled that if it was clear to the court that a defendant had committed murder, but one of the technical factors had not been fulfilled, then the courts were empowered to impose their own form of capital punishment (see Sanhedrin 81b). (Joseph Telushkin "Murder and the Death Penalty")

Sparks for Reflection/Discussion Dennis Prager, in his quarterly journal "Ultimate Issues" (April-June, 1989) asserts that opposition to capital punishment for murder can reveal more about a person than his views on any other contentious issue. One's position on the death penalty is a kind of Rorschach test because the reasons offered by opponents to capital punishment are usually not the reasons for their opposition. Rather, he claims, it has to do with one's ability to recognize evil and to confront it. He believes that "it is not death whose existence people want to deny; it is evil's. The wish to deny evil-specifically, that people are the primary cause of evil-is the strongest denial mechanism operating in the world today - It is particularly strong in the West, among those who believe that people are basically good, and that reason alone, not force, is needed for good to triumph. This denial of evil explains another major belief of opponents of capital punishment-the moral equation of capital punishment with murder. 'To kill the offender is to respond to his wrong by doing the same wrong to him.' (This belief states that) nothing is morally better or worse; no one is morally better or worse. Whether they intend to or not, opponents of capital punishment direct their compassion toward those who commit the greatest evil man can commit. And that misdirected compassion inevitably expresses itself in misdirected crueltytoward the society at large, toward the bereaved who yearn to see justice done, and toward those who fight against the greatest evil man can commit." Do you agree with Prager's argument? Given the great discrepancy in the positions of the Bible and Talmud and perhaps even with the Talmud itself, is Prager correct that our position on capital punishment says more about us than about the issue itself?

PARASHAT KI TETZE September 6, 2003 Annual Cycle: Deuteronomy 21:10-25:19 (Hertz, p. 840; Etz Hayim, p. 1112) Triennial Cycle 2: Deuteronomy 23:8-24:13 (Hertz, p. 847; Etz Hayim, p. 1123) Haftarah: Isaiah 54:1-10 (Hertz, p. 857; Etz Hayim, p. 1137) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: The Primacy of Ethics A handmill or an upper millstone shall not be taken in pawn, for that would be taking someone's life in pawn. (Deut. 24:6) Commentary A. Creditors sometimes took only the upper stone, which weighed only four or five pounds and could not easily be replaced since basalt was not found naturally in most parts of the country. This would suffice to render the mill useless and induce the debtor to repay the debt as soon as possible."That would be taking someone's life in pawn," that is, something vital, a means of survival or anything with which the debtor prepares necessary food. (Jeffrey Tigay, JPS Commentary, on Deut. 24:6) B. You shall not enter his house to fetch his pledge. You shall not sleep with his pledge. You shall restore the pledge. (Deut. 24:10, 12-13) C. If you take your neighbor's garment in pledge, you must return it to him before the sun sets, it is his only clothing, the sole covering for his skin. In what else shall he sleep? Therefore, if he cries out to Me, I will pay heed, for I am compassionate. (Exodus 22:25-26) D. The borrower will cry to God, pleading that he is no different from the lender. Why should the lender enjoy a comfortable night's sleep while he, the borrower, does not because his bed garment was taken from him as a security? Where is the justice in this? He will cry. (Da'at Zekenim on Exodus 22:25) E. If a person holding a pledge dies, he obviously cannot return the pledge to the owner and his children might not be inclined to do so. Hence until the sun goes down, that is until the sun sets on his life, he must instruct his children to return the pledge to the lender and so avoid eventual difficulties and complications. (Keli Yakar on Exodus 22:25) F. If the lender is severely exacting of the borrower, the latter will be compelled to give pledge upon pledge until the lender has him completely under his control. He will then cry out to Me and I will surely listen. (Alshech on Exodus 22:26) G. Thus said the Lord: For three transgressions of Israel and for four, I will not revoke the punishment because they have sold for silver the innocent

and the needy for a hidden gain. They who trample the heads of the poor into the dust of the ground, and thrust the humble off the road upon garments taken in pledge, they stretch themselves out beside every altar. (Amos 2:6-8) H. The creditor may seize whatever he desires except what is essential for life. Amos is not alone in indicting elements of the population for such immoral behavior. Compare the words of the prophet Ezekiel, who uses the seizing or returning of a distraint as one of his criteria for distinguishing between a righteous and wicked man (Ezek. 18:7, 12, 16; 33:15). Job three times refers to the same theme in his catalogue of iniquities committed by the people. "They lead away the donkeys of the fatherless and seize the widow's bull as a pledge" (Job 24:3). Moreover, significantly this accusation in Job is directly followed in the next verse (v. 4) by "They chase the needy off the roads," thereby providing a similar juxtaposition of charges against the wealthy found in Amos 2:7-8. In Amos's denunciation, moreover, these wealthy creditors add insult to injury, for not only do they violate a law that is intended to provide protection for the poor but they also take these very garments and spread out by every altar - Even at the cultic shrines themselves, the wealthy remain insensitive to the illegal and immoral acts they commit against the destitute. Amos - clearly indicates that the taking of basic necessities for reclining and feasting was extremely widespread at this time, thereby poignantly emphasizing how abhorrent their action was. Even if their behavior were within the letter of the law, as long as the poor are made to suffer, the practice is denounced as being totally reprehensible. (Shalom Paul, Commentary on Amos) I. I hate, I despise your festivals. I take no delight in your solemn assemblies. Even if you offer me burnt offerings and your meal offerings, I will not accept them. Remove from me the din of your hymns! And to the melody of your lutes, I will not listen. But let justice roll on like water, and righteousness life an ever-flowing stream. (Amos Chapter 5:21-24) J. To (some), justice was an obligation like other obligations, a commandment among many commandments of the law. Injustice was improper, of course, but neither more nor less offensive than any other infringement of the rules. Amos makes justice the supreme command overriding every other consideration or obligation, however important to the life of the community. Other ills of society are remediable, but injustice is a stab at the vital center of the communal whole. Worship in biblical religion could never be an end in itself, for God is not in need of ritual. In Israel, worship is God's favor to man, an act of His grace intended for the good of man, not God. Worship is meant to inspirit man with passion for justice, to purify and prepare him for the encounter with God. Worship and ritual are means, while justice and righteousness are ends. More, even, righteousness and justice are the encounter. God is justice, and His holiness is exalted in righteousness. (Shalom Spiegel, "Amos v. Amaziah")

Sparks for Reflection/Discussion Amidst all of Deuteronomy's attention to the problem of idolatry, the simple laws of everyday interactions between people might get overlooked. But, as the prophet Amos, notes ethics are primary. Sadly, the Israelites do not take to heart the words of Deuteronomy as the books of Ezekiel, Job, and Amos note. Amos, in particular, speaking to the 8th century BCE citizens of the northern kingdom, says to them that it is not ritual that is paramount but righteousness. "Rite (ritual) without right (righteousness) is wrong," as Professor Shalom Paul puts it. How often do we see "pious" people violating simple ethical norms?! Why is it that we find it much easier to observe ritual than adhere to the ethical standards established by our tradition?

PARASHAT KI TAVO September 13, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Deuteronomy 26:1-29:8 (Hertz, p. 859; Etz Hayim, p. 1140) Triennial Cycle 2: Deuteronomy 26:12-28:6 (Hertz, p. 860; Etz Hayim, p. 1142) Haftarah: Isaiah 60:1-22 (Hertz, p. 874; Etz Hayim, p. 1160) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Happiness As soon as you have crossed the Jordan into the land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall set up large stones. Coat them with plaster and inscribe upon them all the words of this Teaching. When you cross over to enter the land that the Lord your God is giving you, a land flowing with milk and honey, as the Lord, the God of your fathers, promised you-upon crossing the Jordan, you shall set up these stones, about which I charge you this day, on Mount Ebal, and coat them with plaster. There, too, you shall build an altar to the Lord your God, an altar of stones. Do not wield an iron tool over them; you must build the altar of the Lord your God of unhewn stones. You shall offer on it burnt offerings to the Lord your God, and you shall sacrifice there offerings of well-being and eat them, rejoicing before the Lord your God. And on these stones you shall inscribe every word of this Teaching most distinctly. (Deut. 27:2-8) Commentary A. It is taught: Rabbi Yehuda ben Biteira says: when the Temple stood, joy was derived through eating meat as it says in Deut. 27:7 "and you shall sacrifice there offerings of well-being and eat them, rejoicing before the Lord your God." Now that the Temple no longer stands, joy is derived through wine alone, as it says in Psalms 104), "wine gladdens the heart of man." (Pesachim 109a) B. The meaning of the statement in Pesachim 109a is not that today it is not a mitzvah to eat meat on a holiday because doing so no longer brings joy. Rather, even today, one is obligated to eat meat on the holiday because by its nature meat engenders a fullness of spirit and joyfulness of the soul. Yet, because the meat is not sanctified meat and is not, therefore, eaten in Jerusalem, it is not sufficient on its own to raise one's joy to the highest possible level. And thus, one needs an additional ingredient, namely wine which gladdens the heart. (Baruch Epstein in Torah Temimah) C. The happiness with which one should rejoice is the fulfillment of the mitzvot and the love of God who commanded them is a great service. Whoever holds himself back from this rejoicing is worthy of retribution, as Deut. 28:47 states, "...because you did not serve God, your Lord, with happiness and a glad heart." (Maimonides, "The Laws of Lulav")

D. One who is always happy will, by virtue of that happiness experience success in the world. Happiness requires one to muster all one's resources to push away sadness, because one is naturally predisposed to worry about one's troubles. Because one always has troubles and challenges in life, one must actually force oneself willfully with all one's power to be happy. Happiness is, furthermore, an antidote to many maladies. Dancing, singing (music), movement, and exercise of the body uplift the spirit and make possible a feeling of happiness. One should understand that simply the recognition of being Jewish is an amazing fact and a source of joy and happiness. And if one says out loud the phrase, "Praised is God who created us for His glory and distinguished us from those who were not given the Torah," it has the potential to bring great joy. (Rabbi Nachman of Breslav) E. If we understand simcha to be spiritual elation rather than the gratification of all our physical desires, it becomes evident that selfesteem is essential for simcha. Spiritual joy is dependent on a feeling that one is worthwhile, that one's life has a purpose, and that there is significance to one's existence in the universe. The far-reaching effects of low self-esteem can be appreciated if we realize that the ultimate in human error and human transgression, avodah zarah, had its origin in low self-esteem. The Rambam states that idolatry began to sprout because people did not believe that they were deserving of Divine attention. People thought that God withdrew from direct involvement with His creation because it was beneath His dignity to associate with such lowly beings. The Rambam thus points out that avodah zarah is not a denial of the existence of the one true God, but a denial of God's involvement with man, which had its origin in man's feeling unworthy of God's providence. The essence of Jewishness and the refutation of avodah zarah is therefore contingent upon man believing that he is indeed significant and worthy of God's attention. In as much as we have defined self-esteem as an awareness of our capabilities, it follows that as we become increasingly aware of our capabilities, the intensity of our joy should increase. There is yet another important relationship between self-esteem and joy. People who feel themselves to be not only undeserving but also worthless are often haunted by a morbid fear that they do not merit joy, and that any happiness they might experience will be short-lived. They are actually afraid to be happy because they fear that if they are, the object of their joy will be taken from them. But, we should know that we are loved (by God), and that a father does provide for his children out of his great love for them, as long as the children do not use the father's gifts in a destructive manner. Abraham Twersky, "Self-esteem, joy, and enjoying life" in Let us Make Man Among the questions a person will have to answer on his day of judgment before the heavenly tribunal is, "Did you enjoy My world?" Thus appropriate enjoyment of life is essential to living. (Jerusalem Talmud Kiddushin 4:12) F. But we won't find happiness in the ways we've learned all our lives. Popular Western concepts of joy are captured in the declaration by America's founding fathers that all people deserve the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The problem with that notion,

however, is this: Happiness cannot be pursued. When we pursue happiness, it always runs away from us. Instead, we must pursue goals other than happiness, and as a natural by-product of their pursuit, we will be happy. (Marc Gafni in Soul Prints) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion The commandment to rejoice or be happy appears frequently in the Book of Deuteronomy. It appears in Deut. 12:7, 16:14, 15, and in our verse above. What advice do our commentators give to experience this type of joy or happiness? Which of the many bits of advice above resonates most in your life?

PARASHAT NITZAVIM-VAYELEKH September 20, 2003 - 5763 Annual Cycle: Deuteronomy 29:9-31:30 (Hertz, p. 878; Etz Hayim, p. 1165) Triennial Cycle 2: Deuteronomy 30:1-31:6 (Hertz, p. 880; Etz Hayim, p. 1169) Haftarah: Isaiah 60:10-63:9 (Hertz, p. 891; Etz Hayim, p. 1180) Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director Discussion Theme: Repentance When all these things befall you-the blessing and the curse that I have set before you-and you take them to heart amidst the various nations to which the Lord your God has banished you, and you return to the Lord your God, and you and your children heed His command with all your heart and all your soul... then the Lord your God will restore your fortunes and take you back in love. (Deut. 30:1-3) Commentary A. Shuv, "return," is the verb from which teshuvah, the Hebrew term for repentance, is derived. The Hebrew term does not refer only to contrition but to a change of behavior, literally a "return" to God and to the behavior that He requires. The concept of returning to God in the Torah is not identical to its better known from in the Prophets and in classical Judaism. In the Torah it is mentioned only as something that occurs after punishment has taken place: if the people take their punishment to heart and return to God, He will terminate their punishment. The prophets developed the concept further. They called upon people to repent before it was too late, and to thereby avert punishment altogether. The concept of teshuvah in classical Judaism combines both ideas, with emphasis on the latter. (Jeffrey Tigay, JPS Commentary, Deut. 4:30) B. How is one proved to be a true penitent? Said Rabbi Judah: If the opportunity to commit the same sin presents itself on two occasions and he does not yield to it. (Yoma 86b) C. The repentant sinner should strive to do good with the same faculties with which he sinned. With whatever part of the body he sinned, he should now engage in good deeds. If his feet had run to sin, let them now run to the performance of the good. If his mouth had spoken falsehood, let it now be opened in wisdom. Violent hands should now open in charity... The trouble-maker should now become a peace-maker. (Rabbi Jonah Gerondi, The Gates of Repentance) D. Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. (Tolstoy) E. Be the change you want the world to become. (Ghandi)

F. The human flaw is that we can deteriorate. And our virtue is that we can improve. The virtue of angels is that they cannot deteriorate. Their flaw is that they cannot improve. (Author unknown) G. Teshuvah... assumes the possibility of reversing the past. Despite reality's flow, within this unity the future may transform the meaning of the past. The sages, long ago stated that teshuvah existed before the creation of the world, that is, that it is not subject to the usual order of time; or, as Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav had it, since time does not exist for God, "teshuvah is essentially above time." By returning to God, man rises above time and so becomes able to correct the wrongs of the past and see himself as though he were newly born. When this happens, even his former days are transformed for the positive. To use Soloveitchik's expression, the most essential aspect of teshuvah is that "the future has overcome the past." (Ehud Luz, "Repent") H. We seek teshuvah because in the Jewish tradition the aim of life is to grow in soul. That is why an old rabbinic saying asserts that a repentant sinner stands upon a height that not event the greatest tzaddik (righteous person) can reach. The growth that is required to acknowledge one's sin, to seek to repair it, and to change one's ways is enormous and impressive. With each of those steps, the individual climbs higher and reaches towards holiness. We sin for many reasons---fear, insensitivity, cruelty, a hunger for pleasure. But true teshuvah comes not from fear or from the desire for pleasure but from something deeper. True teshuvah comes from a wellspring of joy. That may sound strange considering the terror and worry and anguish that consciousness of our sins sometimes causes us. But the end of a soul aligned with itself, with others, and with God is a feeling of great joy... Teshuvah is the soul's homecoming in this world. The pain of sin has been transfigured to joy, and the past has become a path back to God. (David Wolpe in Why be Jewish?) I. The Baal Shem Tov once met a cantor in a small community who used to recite the Al Chet with a lively tune rather than with the traditional somber melody that befits such a solemn prayer. He asked the cantor to explain this unusual behavior, and the cantor replied, "If a devoted servant of a king is assigned the task of cleaning the palace and removing all the trash, would he not be jubilant in the knowledge that he is beautifying the king's abode? Man is the palace of God, because He resides within each of us. When I confess my sins and dispose of objectionable matter that has accumulated within me, and thereby make myself into a more acceptable and suitable place for God to dwell, should I not rejoice?" (Abraham Twersky in Let us Make Man) Sparks for Reflection/Discussion What factors stand in the way of doing teshuvah? What can we do as a community to create a teshuvah community, one where people take seriously the desire and need to correct shortcomings? Which of the above commentators inspires you most?