Shoftim discussion

Shofetim 5769

…an Evening Prayer. With Ramifications.

It is praiseworthy for a person to forgive anyone who has wronged him or caused him any distress. This concept is expressed in this prayer recited before Keriat Shema.

R’bono sh’l olam! Master of the Universe! I hereby forgive any one who as angered or antagonized me, or who has done wrong against me, whether to my body, whether to my property, whether accidentally, whether intentionally, whether in speech, whether in action, whether in thought, whether contemplatively, whether in this existence, whether in another existence, I forgive any member of the nation of Yisrael, and may there not be punished any person on my account. Y’he rotzon… May it be there not be punished any person on my account. May it be Your will, HaShem, my Elokim and Elokim of my forefathers, that I not do wrong any more and whatever I have done wrong before You, erase in Your abundant mercy, but not through sufferings or afflictions that are evil. May they be an appeasement, [Yehyu l’ratzon emray fe, v’h’geyon lebey lfane’kh yhvh tzurey v’go-aley] the utterances of my mouth and the thought of my heart, before You, HaShem, my Rock and my Redeemer.


The individual then says
(Before the Keriat Shema):
Eil Melekh ne’aman.
El and King Who is trustworthy.



Now; what have we learned from this prayer? Before you answer, I want to first draw your attention to the words: “…whether in this existence, whether in another existence…”; does anyone have any ideas about who wrote this prayer; where; or when? And specifically what did the author (or authors) have in mind?
NOW; what have we learned from this prayer?

Source: Siddur Meor Yisrael Har Tov Publishers Jerusalem 5762 (pp361~362)

The Broken Vav

Throughout the halacha it is stressed that letters must be written as a complete guf (body) and if they are faded or partly illegible then the work is invalid.

Let us go back a couple of weeks to take another look at Parshat Pinchas...

vav k’ti’ah (the broken/severed vav)


However there is one exception were the scribe is mandated to make the letter incomplete. The letter in question in thevav in the word shalom in Numbers 25:12. This must be written with a break in the vertical line according to the Ritva (R. Yom Tov ben Avraham Ishbili Spain c. 1250-1330), though some think it either a small vav or a normal vav but a little shorter "in front".

The following six suggestions and graphic (left) come from Hadaf Hayomi (a regular newsletter on the talmud), explaining the possible options. I have added a few of my own thoughts in brackets:

1. It is a small vav (though this is not mentioned as one of the small letters and would be referred to as z’ira (small) and not k’tia)
2. The leg of the vav is shorter (though this in part would look a bit like a yud without the curve to the leg, so may be declared pasul because of that)
3. First a yud is written (though without the curve) and a space is left and then line is added to complete the vav.
4. A regular vav is written and then a crack is made in the leg by scraping out the ink and (this would divide it into two)
5. The same again, but this time the crack is a diagonal nick which doesn’t quite break the letter into two (I have a problem with 4 and 5 as it rather suggests chok tochot, carving out to form the letter as this particular letter form would be formed by scraping and not writing).
6. A vav with a slightly short leg is written then a small line is added to complete the length.
It would seem that 3 or 6 would be the most suitable.
The text concerns a covenant of peace (brit shalom) that is offered to Pinchas the somewhat over-zealous and fiery priest who skewered Zimri, the leader of the tribe of Shimon and Kozbi a midianite woman. Pinchas' act stopped both the Israelite's bout of immoral behaviour and the plague they had been suffering because of it, and he was rewarded for it.
However even the Massoretes must have been shocked by the violence of Pinchas' action as they made his blessing only partial through the broken vav which explains that true peace cannot be brought about through violence and that the two concepts are incompatible.
Similarly the Talmud (Kiddushin 66b) notes that the service of a person must be perfect and without blemish, by reading shalom without the vav as shalem - whole, perfect, sound and translate Numbers 25:12 as ‘behold I give to him my covenant of perfection’ - only when he is perfect and not found wanting.

________the thoughts and ideas of Mortachai Pinchas

A Talmud overview

Talmud Bavli

This week, as a prelude to the Presentation scheduled for next Sunday, we will discuss a bit of the details of the Talmud in outline as an introduction – and hopefully this will give you a little taste of what you will see next week. Just in case you do not know about what I am referring to: Next Sunday (not tomorrow) The Men’s Club of Congregation Beth Shalom (Bermuda Dunes, CA) is having a catered kosher brunch at 10:30. They are putting this on with an open invitation to all who are interested. There is a $10. charge (or recommended donation) for members and $12. for non-members. But the interesting thing is that the morning is being presented in conjunction with our Shabbos Torah Study Group! After the brunch there is a no-charge video presentation on the Talmud. I have previewed this and I strongly recommend it – Rated ‘FFBB’ & ‘NOJ’ alike. There will also be some printed information available. S0… let’s take a peek at what we might see/learn next week.

There are, as you already know, two Talmuds. The Babylonian Talmud, which is the one that is usually referred to when we mention the Talmud. And there is the Jerusalem Talmud. Both were written concurrently & simultaneously too. This places the writings at the time of our Galut in Babylonian lands.

But let’s first look at the Tradition(s) here. First we received, as a Nation, the Written Law in the form of two tablets. At the same time we received the Oral Law which was passed from generation to generation (L’dor v’dor). And so the “Five Books of Moses” [Torah] were finally presented in written form – but you may not know that the form was not ‘set’ and canonized until about the year 500 CE!



Before that had happened, the Jews had dispersed in different directions and we find that Rabbi Judah HaNasa (c. 220 CE) wrote what we now know as the Mishnah. Next week the movie and our written materials will cover this in greater depth.

At the time of the Mishnah, we also find what is called the Berita (legal documents and materials). And the Teachers of the Berita are called Tanna.
Finally we arrive at the Talmud (c. 475 CE). The first Editor was Rav Ashi. At this time the Teachers of Talmud – or Gemara – were known as Amoraim (sing. Amora).

After the Talmud we find the Commentators and Codifiers. There are many of these men who labored to clarify the writings and to discourse with one another. The one that you find in every edition of the Chumah is… Rashi; he was extremely important to the understanding and is the most referred to Commentator in the Talmud. [In the Chumash, he shares the pages with another name which may or may not be familiar to you: Onchlos. We will discuss him at another time].

Other of the authors are, to mention briefly, all (but one) Sephardic Jews, and most of them lived in the Iberian territories. They include Rabbi Yehudah Alfasi; Rabbi Shlomo ben Yitzaki (who we know as Rashi); Tosafot; the great Maimonedes (known as Rambam); The ‘Rosh’ – or Rabbynu Asher and Joseph Karo.

It was not until the 16th Century CE that we find commentaries written to reflect the traditions of the Northern Jews – the Ashkenazi Jews.

But for a better understanding of the influences that we find on the authors of these commentaries, it is important to understand the travels of the Jews in the Galut (Golus), and especially how the Jewish Experience while in Muslim Spain- Al-Andalus. The history is so filled with wondrous adventures of our ancestors and we should spend more time learning about it! [Was Columbus a crypto-Jew in reality? Who was Ziryab? Why did the Christian Kings in Spain ignore the laws of the Pope regarding the Jews… and how did they get away with it all?] Fascinating stuff really…

Let me mention just a few other names of important Jews who, if they did not have a direct impact on the Talmud, had a strong indirect impact by laying down the basis and the framework for the Jews in the Mediterranean world. The built a position on which later Jewish thinkers would be able to stand!
Among the forceful personalities that led to the flowering of Hebrew poetry, prose, philosophy, and politics with an emphasis on the verbal rather than the pictorial, I would have to mention Hasdai (the Nasi) ibn Shaprut. It was he, whose written communications with Joseph, King of the Khazars, that led to the wholesale conversion of what was, in truth, the Nation of Israel – a Nation that extended from the Middle East, from the Mediterranean all the way into Russian! Then there was Samuel (Ha’Nagid) ibn Hagrela who became the Vizier of the Kingdom of Granada!

This is the briefest of overviews concerning the Talmud and I apologize for letting so much information “hanging” but I “Do not want to ‘give-away’ the store” because I do want you to attend this Sunday morning brunch and learning session. IF you are unavailable (show me a note from your mother…) and I will get a copy of the program and additional details to you in one manner or another. In the meantime, there is a book that gives you a grounding in the environment(s) in which these people found themselves and provides you with an understanding of how HaShem led these thoughts to germinate and flower until we find the rich tapestry of the Talmud.
That book is:
The Jews of Spain – A History of the Sephardic Experience by Jane S. Gerber [The Free Press Division of Macmillian, Inc. 1992]. Jane Gerber is professor of Jewish history and director of the Institute for Sephardic Studies at CUNY Graduate Center.
Shalom

Jewish Prayer

Jewish prayer is, and can be, many things:
 Many times it is our way of saying “Thank You.” to HaShem. Why? Because of His gifts, His miracles that surround us, the Blessings that He bestows upon us.
 It can be a song. A song of praise. A song from our heart is a song of praise. A melody that tells HaShem what a wonderful world.
 A story. Like the stories in our Jewish books – all of our books! Stories of our ancestors, our Kings, our adventures and misadventures, the lives of our tzaddakim. And, of course, stories of the wonders of G_d!
 A prayer can be our asking for a little red wagon when we are children, for a soul-mate to live our lives with, for the health of our loved ones, for parnassah, and for our Nation and our State of Israel.
 It is sometimes simply our talking to G_d, in private, alone at night, sitting in shule while you meditate, crying at the Kotel (Wall), and telling HaShem how much we love Him and respect Him.
 Tefelah – Jewish Prayer – has a root with the original(?) meaning: “think”. Don’t you ‘think’ about the great things, the unusual thing, and the unexplained things that you perceive in your world? Don’t you ‘think’ about why you are sometimes are lonely (even when you are surrounded by your fellow Jews), or sad, sick or home-sick for your parent’s home, you mother’s cooking? Don’t you ‘think’ about the bad things that you see happening in this world? Don’t you ‘think’ about the cruel things that you see or hear about – and you want to cry out to G_d: “WHY?”
 Those are prayers too. Prayer is also a way to show our feelings.
 Prayer is also those written poems and prose that we find in the Siddurim. Beautiful thoughts and feelings in wondrous forms – written by our rabbis, our teachers our poets and our prophets. Written for us, years later, to find and ‘think’ about. And written in Hebrew and Aramaic so we can ponder on just what inflection the author had in mind… and what it mean to us today.




So do you ask: Why do we pray? Or do you ask: Why should I pray? Our ancient ancestors did not “pray” – they took their best, their best sheep or cow, or grain – their very best and offered it to HaShem as a “sacrifice”. So too, when we rise early to go to a Minyan and ‘pray’ we are making our own “sacrifice”, our own offering.

The Talmud says that “Prayer is greater than sacrifices.” Even Moses, our greatest prophet, was answered by G_d only after he had prayed. And so, we open our heart to G_d, in prayer, to become (more) pure, (more) wise, (more) kind and “good” to become MORE G_d-like. And we pray to share ourselves with all Israel, sharing in their joys and their sorrows. We pray to be a part of Shalom.



Yisrael Betzalel ben Avraham
17 Tammuz 5769
CA Bamidbar

Shabbos Torah Study Group on the 4th of July 2009

Chazal this, Chazal that… and now Chazal note…

We read that; “HaShem opened the mouth of the she-donkey and it said to Bilaam, ‘What? What have I done to you that you have struck me these three times?’” (22:28). And then we find: Chazal note… and this is what they note: the word(s) in Torah do not use the “usual” [meaning either ‘common’ or ‘more grammatically correct’] pe’omim which means “times”. Rather, they say, we find the word(s) regalim which refers to Shalosh Regalim – the Three Festivals.

Nu?

Well, my ethological dictionaries confirm this. Pe’omim means approximately: “three-fold times develop(ed) by agitation”; while Regalim [Regaleem] specifically refers to Pesach, Shavuot & Sukkot! So the first question that comes to (my) mind is: Have we yet been formally introduced to our Obligation to leave our homes and our fields and travel to Yerushalayim? If we have not, then how would we be expected to perceive this differentiation that the donkey makes in her speech? Further, if we have come to understand that once we live in Eretz Israel, we shall have this obligation – can we, at this point in our bamidbar travels understand this distinction? What I am trying to understand is what our ancestors would know and understand – at this point in their desert journey. IS this change of words lost on our people? Or are Chazal, too deep within the forest to see it for the trees?

The point that Chazal makes is that the House of Israel, having such devotion to HaShem as to leave their homes three times a year to travel to Yerushalayim, would hardly be affected or influenced by a curse hurled at them by any heathen – including one as influential as Bilaam. That seems to me to be a rather simplistic approach to explaining an animal speaking Aramaic – or any other human language! It is an interesting concept that has some merit, but we would have to consider the audience that it might be addressed to and their level of understanding, which is exactly what I question.

Of course there are other Rabbis who have other perceptions of this part of our Torah. One such approach is to put additional words into the mouth of this she-donkey, to the effect of this: She (the donkey) is (in effect) saying to her master, “A nation whose allegiance is so steadfast, who are willing to sacrifice themselves in order to preserve the integrity and immortality of the Torah, will not fall prey to your curses.” This rabbi adds: ‘If only we would retain that sense of fidelity…” And again, we have a rabbi who is speaking to US – and not to understanding our ancestors. This is obvious. Look at what these people have done so far [afraid of crossing the Sea of Reeds, fearful of not having food, building golden idols, causing dissent, etc. etc. etc.]! And now we are expected to believe that they can and do perceive the difference between pe’omim and regalim? So, If we can accept talking donkeys (as well as other animals with speech) what are we to take, for ourselves, from this Parshat?

Perhaps my Friday evening Erev Shabbat service “drash” holds the answer??

Erev Shabbat

“…AND, the First Runner Up: (pause) IS: (pause) Balaam’s Ass”


Ladies and Gentlemen… Tonight’s Award for Second Place, for a talking animal in the Torah; goes to Balaam’s Donkey. Next year, when we again begin to read the Torah from Bereshit, we will encounter that animal who takes away First Place. If… you don’t know who that is you will have to wait until: MID-October.

But: On With Tonight’s Award! This donkey did not make an ass of itself with this performance. NO! This was a part full of drama, suspense, and considerable mystery. And our award winner certainly filled the part well; remaining silent in the face of adversity and letting the tension build until finally it explodes with that memorable line; “What have I done to you that you have beaten me these three times?" And again that famous line that shows that the donkey is more than a little upset: "Look, I am the donkey that you have been riding all along until this day! Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?" she says. What pathos this poor animal pours out in just those twenty-nine words! Let me tell you, Ladies and Gentlemen; the Academy had a very hard time choosing between First and Second place this year.

Of course, you can say that Shreck’s donkey had a lot more to say but never did he speak from the heart and reach out to us like this donkey did! By now, my friends, you know the story: Balak is worried about the Nation of Israel and calls upon Balaam to curse them – Our Ancestors! Well, Balaam was not going to take that kind of commission without approval from his superior: HaShem.

But then, I ask, why would G-d condone Balaam's trip in one instant and then condemn it the next? But before we go into that part of the story, let’s look at the film clip where Balaam was riding on his donkey when all of the sudden: "The donkey caught sight of the angel of the L-rd standing in the way, with his drawn sword in his hand!
The donkey, of course, swerved from the road and went into the fields; and Balaam beat his donkey to turn her back onto the road."
This occurs again! The donkey sees the fiery angel of G-d blocking the path and swerves off the path to try to avoid it. Balaam does not appear to see this angel, and each time he hits the donkey until the donkey veers back onto the desired course. The third time the donkey sees the angel, the donkey lies down and stops moving. This infuriates Balaam, who begins beating the donkey. And then… something strange happens. The donkey talks. She asks Balaam, "What have I done to you that you have beaten me these three times?" Perhaps even stranger is the fact that Balaam responds to the donkey as if it were normal that the donkey spoke to him. Balaam responds that the donkey has embarrassed him so much that if he had a sword he would kill the donkey on the spot. Obviously the donkey is, as I said before, very upset by this and puts Balaam in his place by saying, "Look, I am the donkey that you have been riding all along until this day! Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?" Of course, Balaam can only sheepishly respond "no," and then he sees the angel for the first time and truly understands his error.

There is much that can be said about the story of Balaam and his donkey and many questions that need to be answered. Maimonides, a medieval Jewish philosopher, suggests that the entire incident was a prophetic vision, and none of it really happened. But we need to stop for a moment here and think about this.

As I said before, this is not the only animal with a speaking part in Torah. In the different situations we have the following things to consider:
1. An animal is using human speech,
2. The human, in each situation, does not consider it unusual.
3. The human responds to the animal, and…
4. The animal again speaks.
What’s going on here? I know that when I lived in Japan, I encountered dogs that seemed to understand Japanese but not English – but then they did not talk back either (at least in human voices).

Is this something like Greek Theatre with gods speaking to humans from off-stage? Or is it something that Disney’s Imagineering thought-up and went back and pasted it into the Bible?

HaShem, we know can do just anything He wants… but what is He teaching us here with a taking donkey? A donkey with such reasoning power and emotions?

Let’s look at what Nachmanides, a medieval commentator, suggests. He says that the donkey did in fact talk to Balaam to remind him and future readers that G-d can control even a human's most basic functions. The ability to speak is something that G-d can give even to a donkey and that if G-d can give speech to a donkey then G-d can take speech away from humans.

The Sforno, a Renaissance-era Bible commentator, takes a different approach. He suggests that the story is really about paying attention to signs. The behavior of the donkey should have been a sign to Balaam that what he was about to do was not good in the eyes of G-d. However, I think that at its most basic level this story of Balaam and his donkey is about two very important things. First and foremost, it is about the power and importance of words. Words have the ability to build up or break down, to heal or to hurt, to bless or to curse. The fact that Balaam is seemingly unaware of the power he has to hurt people through his words is what infuriates G-d. We are all given permission by G-d to say whatever we wish. The gift of speech and communication is unlike any other gift that G-d has given us, but it is one that must be treated with respect and with the cognizance of the power it has. And, I might add, that the power to communicate is not always limited to the verbal. And just as words have the power to heal or to hurt, so to are voices of communication found in painting, the written word as prose or poetry, and even, perhaps, in the different forms of dance! But this Parshat, this donkey, this… this is about speech.

Perhaps more importantly, this is a story about trust. Balaam is too consumed with being embarrassed in front of the messengers of Balak who are accompanying him on his journey to "listen" to the advice and warnings of one of his most trusted allies. The donkey may be an animal incapable of speech, perhaps forgotten or taken for granted, but ultimately, the donkey is the only one who can truly see everything that lies in front of her master. The question of who is really the master in this story is an interesting one and leads to one final thought.

In life we can often get stuck on the proverbial high horse and forget that our most trusted companions - and even sometimes the people in our lives who we think cannot possibly see or understand what we are going through - - they are the people with the clearest vision and the people whom we can trust the most. Not everyone will be called upon in life to be a leader or a prophet like Balaam, but it is important to remember that sometimes the most unlikely of people have the clearest vision and are the most capable of leading us in the right direction.

Shabbat Shalom, and I hope that in each Shabbat that you find, is filled with happiness, clarity of vision and trust in those who help you get from one place to the next on your own life journey.

Don’t be an ass. Listen to those people in your life that mean so much to you, and don’t think that they are an ass for wanting to be in your life too.


I share credit for these thoughts with Reuben Posner, Fellow at Hillel's Joseph Meyerhoff Center for Jewish Learning

beginning 2 end

Parshas Shlach
The Connection between the Beginning and the End of the Parsha

Adapted from Rabbi Yissocher Frand, “…on the weekly portion.”

This parsha begins with the story of the sending out of the Spies, and ends with the mitzvah of Tzitzis [fringes on the corners of a four- cornered garment]. There is a word that is used several times in this parsha, in different grammatical formulations, that is a rather uncommon word in the Torah overall. In the beginning of the parsha, the verse reads, "Send out men that they might spy out (v'yasuru) the Land of Canaan" [Bamidbar 13:12]. That same word is used at the end of the parsha in the mitzvah of Tzisis. "And you shall not stray (v'lo sasuru) after your hearts and eyes that lead you astray" [Bamidbar 15:39].
This irony is not lost on Rashi or on any other classic Torah commentary. It is too striking to be overlooked. Rashi comments: The heart and the eyes are "spies" for the body, procuring sins for it. The eye sees, the heart desires, and the body sins. In other words there is a deep connection between the tragic mission of the spies and the warning against straying after one's heart and eyes.
The Shemen HaTov suggests that there is a more profound connection. Rashi uses the expression "the eye sees and the heart desires (ha'ayin ro-eh v'halev chomed)." If indeed the sequence is that the eye sees, the heart desires, and then the body sins, why doesn't the pasuk [verse] read: "you shall not stray after your eyes and your heart"? The sequence of the pasuk is the reverse -- "you shall not stray after your heart and after your eyes!"
Apparently it does begin in the heart! How so? The answer is that all of us were born with a conscience. For most of us that conscience is still active. Before we do something we are not supposed to do, our conscience gives us problems. A little voice in our head announces: "Don't go there. Don't do this. This is not for you. Stay away."
How do we get beyond that nagging voice? We get beyond that nagging voice by using our uncanny ability to rationalize. We rationalize the voice away. We can make up the greatest excuses and we can turn virtually every sin into a mitzvah. "I need it. I have to have it. I'm down. I'm depressed. I'm poor. I'm this, I'm that, whatever. It will be good for me."
This is what we do. To accomplish this rationalization we need a heart. We need the heart-triggered process to somehow turn that sin into a mitzvah. This is the sequence of "do not stray after your hearts and your eyes." True, as Rashi says, it physically starts with the eyes. But psychologically it must go first through the heart. The heart has to "permit it" for us through its illogical process of rationalization. [In Judaism, the seat of understanding and reason is the heart. ed.]
This is precisely what happened with the 10 spies (all except for Yehoshua and Kalev). They were sent on a mission to view Eretz Yisrael. They all came back with a negative report. What was their problem? Why did they view everything that could have been viewed in a positive light, in a negative light instead? The answer, the commentaries tell us, is that they rationalized.
Either they saw themselves in a position of leadership and sensed that when they were settled in Eretz Yisrael they would lose that leadership, or life in the desert was too cozy. They would get up in the morning and find their Manna. They did not need to worry about their clothes wearing out. They did not need to worry about shelter. They did not need to worry about digging or planting. They did not need to worry about farming or earning a living. In the Wilderness, they were worry-free. Such a life was not easy to give up.
Whatever their logic, it was their rationalization and their fear –- all triggered by their heart -– that perverted their actions. This is the connection between the words "v'yasuru es Eretz Canaan" at the beginning of the parsha and the "v'lo sasuru achrei levavchem v'achrei eineichem" at the end of the parsha.
We need to be constantly on guard lest our hearts stray and turn -- through rationalization -- every sinful matter into a mitzvah.
Good Shabbos!