The Brits are at it again

I'm sorry it you cannot read this. You can try to "click" on the image above and it may enlarge it enough for you to read.
In any case it is from the [Los Angeles] Jewish Journal for Nov. 13~19, 2009.
(yah, way back then...)
I would suggest that you look this up on their web-site, if you are unable to enlarge it here.
It is a remarkable read. We were "thrown out of the UK once" (and brought back by the man whose ONLY claim to fame can be that we welcomed the Jews back into [what was then: Britain] on to the isles. Now (with the pressure by the Muslims) they are trying to do it again.
Go read about it - find it in the archives of http://www.jewishjournal.com
It is worth the effort.
Let me - and all the readers - know how you feel about this.
Thanx
Shalom

A Shtikl Kabbalah; A Shtikl Pirkei Avos… A Shtikl Maharal of Prague.

Maharal makes an introduction to learning the mishnah of Prikei Avos with the following:”For a lamp is the commandment and Torah is light, and the way to life is admonitions of corrections.” (Mishlei 6:23) Light being the Biblical and the rabbinic metaphor for intellect, as in; light reveals our surroundings; horizons and pathways, so light can illuminate a goal and the steps necessary to obtain that goal.

The Maharal [Moreinu HaRav Yehudah Loew (b Betzalel) of Progue] lived from 1512 to 1609 CE. He was a contemporary of R. Yosef Karo and R. Yitchok Luria. He taught a metaphysical system that draws upon the Zohar and other Kabbalistic works. He is known, in the tradition, as the creator of the Golem [Goilem, in the neighboring Yiddish speaking communities]. And he used the word “Torah” in many different connotations. The most common being as a system of values and relationships (to) determine positive actions by which we can elevate ourselves to eternal life…

The Torah could also refer to:

§ The Ten Commandments

§ The 613 commandments

§ All commandments, including rabbinical ordinances

§ The study of Torah

§ The Talmud (reasons and principles underlying the Mishnah)

§ The definition of all existence and relationships.

Thus, Torah is a system that regulates human life (Jewish life). Torah is pure intellect, sechel. Unlike human intellect, it is completely independent, nidval (separate) of physical existence, chomer.

Now, let’s go back to the opening statement. “For a lamp is the commandment”; where the practice (physical) of mitzvot is likened to a “lamp”; where the metaphor being that a wick, oil and container form a physical base for an ethereal flame. Likewise, our physical practice of the mitzvoth is the basis of a Divine light to settle upon us.

“…and Torah is light”. As light is intangible, so too Torah is entirely free of physical limitations. Unlike the mitzvots, which are physical actions and fixed in time and limited in effect. Torah is no limit in time or impact.

“…and the way to life is admonitions of correction.” “The way to life” refers to the eternal life of the world to come. Further; the light of Torah and (our) performance of the mitzvoth may not be enough for us to attain reaching the World to Come… we need the ‘admonitions of correction” of parents, teachers and others who have gained wisdom through experience, study and guidance from their own teachers!

The way to life (or) Derech Chaim in this verse refers to and means “the way to the Tree of Life”, Scripture’s metaphor for the essence of Torah, which originates in the highest spiritual realm.

To summarize, the practice of mitzvoth, and the study of the divine wisdom of Torah are vehicles that bring us to eternal life. Mussar, admonition, keeps us away from the death that lurks behind the distractions of physical desire. The tractate of Pirkei Avos, small is size and immense in value, is a compleat manual of sage guidance to keep us focused on Torah and the mitzvot.

This is only an introduction the Maharal’s line of thinking and teaching. From a giant of Judaism, we can continue and learn A Shtikl Kabbalah and A Shtikl Pirkei Avos. But hopefully, we would learn more than a mere shtikl - for what good is it to try to learn Torah to change our lives by using college Cliff Notes or Torah for Dummys! Learning Torah is not like learning calculus or British Lit 101 for learning Torah is a life long learning process and one which we [L’Dor v’Dor] are obligated to pass on to the generations of Jews yet unborn – for whatever the media tells us about the ascendancy of the Muslims, we need to remember HaShem’s compact with us and that we have survived the Greeks, the Egyptians, the Romans the Russian pogroms and the Nazi efforts and six great Arab states to destroy us, no one has done so yet. Go. Learn your Torah. And teach Torah to our children and children’s children.

Shalom,

Midrash Medrish Schmidrash

ontent="Word.Document">

Midrash… or as we sometimes say: ‘Medrish’

Medrish, we are told, deals with discontinuity. What does that mean? Well, the Torah in particular and the Hebrew Bible all together is written in a pretty laconic style. For example, we read in the narrative of Cain and Abel; “Cain said to Abel, his brother. And it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and slew him.” (Gen. 4:8) Nu? What was said? This is the discontinuity with which Medrish deals.

Fine. So. What is Medrish? And who says that what is in the Medrish is what was? These are questions that are asked frequently around here and they deserve and answer. But certainly this is a topic which could involve study for months… or years. Maybe to be continued in another lifetime.

So we will simply look at a couple of examples and they will, perhaps, help us to understand just what a Midrash is and on what basis is has “validity”. The Temple has been destroyed now for the second time. Our forefathers are in distress. They are experiencing discontinuity first hand – and we in the third person. These dramatic events found response in Medrish. In this instance it is rather in the form of Aggadah (story, if you will) – but also in a Halakhic form also.

After the Temple was torn asunder, the Jews turned to the rabbis for hope and for consolation. From this we received Lamentations Rabbah. Here is an example:

“This I recall to mind, therefore I have hope.” __Lam. 3:21

R. Abba ben Kahana said; this may be likened to a king who married a lady and wrote her a large ketubah: “so many state-apartments I am preparing for you, so many jewels I am preparing for you, and so much silver and gold I give you.”

The king (then) left her and went to a distant land for many years. Her neighbots used to vex her saying, “Your husband has deserted you. Come and be married to another man.” She wept and sighed, but when she went into her room and read her ketubah she would be consoled. After many years the king returned to her and said; “I am astonished that you waited for me…” She replied, “My lord king, if it hadnot been for the ketubah you wrote… surely my neighbors would have won me over.”

So the nations of the world taunt Israel and say, “Your G-d has no need of you; He has deserted you… com to us and we shall appoint commanders and leaders of every sort for you.” Israel enters the synagogues and houses of study and reads the Torah, “I will look with favor upon you… and I shall not spurn you.” (Lev. 26:9~11) and they are consoled.

And so, in the future the Holy One, blessed be He will say to Israel, “I am astonished that you waited for me all these years.” And Israel will say, “If it had not been for the Torah which you gave us… the nations of the world would have led us astray.” Therefore it is stated, “This do I recall and therefore I have hope.” (Lam. 3:21)

This then is an example of a medrashic text that the rabbis spun in response to the calamity of the Temple’s destruction. G-d seems to have deserted Israel, but when He returns, G-d will be astonished by our adherence to His teachings. Here the rabbis attempt to bridge the chasm between faith and despair through the Medrish. The stories attempt to make sense out of history. Is there a Medrish to deal with the Shoah? Yes. Several. Not all written by rabbis. Not all successful. But we need to ask: successful to whom? Israel? The author? Select individuals? And they are still being written.

The Medrish then provides-

Y Motivations

Y Meanings

Y Resolving confusions

Y New ideas… [without getting ahead of ourselves: we read the Torah each time with different eyes, needs, desires, hopes]

You ask; how did they do it?

We can never be certain if the rabbis were aware that they were “changing” Torah with their medrish. (Or not)

It is certain that they say that laws were being reformulated and, perhaps, they knew that ideas and values were being changed as well, but the assumption in rabbinic thought is always that new interpretations is implied by Torah itself! The rabbis’ idea is that they were uncovering what is already there!

Here is, perhaps, the key point: to the rabbis the torah was (is) an eternally relevant book because it was written (dictated, inspired – it does not matter) by a perfect Author, an Author who intended it to be eternal!

Surely, it is said, that G-d could foresee the need for new interpretations (all interpretations therefore) already in the Torah’s text. Therefore when HaShem gave us the Written Torah at Mount Sinai, He also gave us Oral Torah – the interpretations of Jews down through time. You might say that Medrish was already in His mind when Torah was conceived. “Turn it and turn it again, for everything is contained therein.” [Or: “There is nothing new under the sun.”]

Let me then posit a question for you. What is a sermon? Is it not a form of Medrash? Do we not lean on those who have taught us and the words that we have read, to develop our own ideas (new!! ideas) about the parshat? Of course. We have Homiletical Medrish and Exegetical Medrishim and Narrative Medrish. All fodder for sermons. In a sense, we continue to develop new (!!) Medrish every time we deliver a sermon, discuss a portion of Torah text, give a d’var, or in any other way discuss our understandings of what Torah means to us today.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. Go study, study; Isaac Heinemann’s “Creative Historiography” and “Creative Philology”. Happy hunting.

Based on “Back to the Sources”, by Barry W. Holtz Summit Books, NY, NY 1984

Ripped from the Headlines...

“Is Parole a ‘Right’ or a ‘Privilege’?”

The current economic recession has forced some states to consider reducing prison personnel, but that then requires the states to reduce the number of inmates that they can then accommodate. In order that the number of inmates who are being released, prison officials, parole boards and the governor of the state(s) must make decisions which impact the community-at-large.


“Killers who are eligible for early release can’t be denied just because of their crimes, some judges have ruled.” (emphasis added) This is the ‘sub-heading’ according to a story in a recent Los Angeles Times newspaper. Before we consider a recapitulation of this story, which has many ramifications for society as well as the individuals concerned, we should probably consider the basis upon which the United States of America has been built.


We frequently hear how this country was established using “Judeo-Christian” Ethics. And, again, without discussing how the “Christian” ethics came out of the Jewish Torah; we should consider just what it is that the Torah [the Five Books of Moses] and the Tanach [the entire Jewish Bible] teaches us that would have an impact and relevance on this matter. [Do not become concerned with the famous “eye-for-an-eye” discussion, for - unless you are grounded in Talmudic literature and discussions – you will be led to make wrong assumptions!]



Now, let’s look at some of the items touched on in this [(©) Sunday 13 December 2009] article:
A convict, James Alexander, has spent 26 years in prison for killing a (fellow) drug dealer but has maintained a “spotless behavior” and has helped other inmates to shake addictions. He has been recommended, on three occasions, for parole by the parole commissioners and Gov. Schwarzenegger has over-ruled them. He, Alexander, is one of the many so-called ‘lifers’ deemed rehabilitated but have not been released as their crime was murder.
In recent years some judges (we are not told how many) have sided with the ‘lifers’ – see the comment above! The judges claim that there must be ‘some evidence’ that they would pose a threat to public safety if released. This legal notion that puts the onus on corrections officials is being challenges in the U.S, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
In California there are about 23,000 prisoners serving life sentences that are ‘technically’ eligible for parole. Another 4,000 serving life without parole and 685 on death row who can never be considered for release under these conditions. In the state of California the 1980’s had a succession of ‘tough-on-crime’ governors. In 1983 Gov. George Deukejian invoked a rarely used 1913 law to over-rule the parole board to free murderer William Archie Fain after an angry outcry from the community where Fain’s victims had lived. Since then successive governors more frequently reversed parole grants.\

Despite a federal court order to reduce prison over-crowding (in CA), neither Schwarzenegger nor corrections officials have suggested (even) considering violent offenders for early release. Victims’ rights organizations defend the governor’s power (and responsibility) to keep murders off the streets [especially with the current economic crisis which has cut funding for law enforcement and parole supervision]! “For the sake of public safety – that’s what we have life sentences for,” said the head of Crime Victims United of California; “That should be a deterrent to crime: that you won’t ever get out if you get a life sentence.” ("Don't talk the talk, if you can't walk the walk.")

Meanwhile, Bill Schmidt, an attorney who specializes in representing lifers, says that, “The question of whether reformed prisoners should get parole is often clouded by the horrific nature of their crime.” He sites Charles Manson who has shown little remorse or rehabilitation (for his 1969 cult slayings), while some of his accomplices have maintained unblemished records for almost four decades. Still, he claims, that they have systematically been denied parole.

Popular opinion supports keeping the most notorious killers locked up forever. Schmidt (attempts to make his case by saying): “Where does the law give the subjective authority to say ‘No, your crime was so horrendous that we’re not ever going to let you out’?” In a recent case before a three-judge panel, the judges stated that the parole board’s decision (against a murderer) in 2008, that the prisoner’s constitutional right (?) to due process had been violated [because the Gov. failed to cite evidence that the prisoner was still dangerous]. The judges ruled that a parole board’s decision “deprives a prisoner of due process with respect to this [liberty] interest” if the decision is “not supported by some evidence in the record or is otherwise arbitrary.” [Please note that] the judges’ decision was suspended four months later by the court’s vote to reconsider the case by a full 11-judge panel.

A Supervising Deputy Atty. General has urged the appeals court to reconsider whether prisoners have a liberty interest in parole decisions, arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court hasn’t recognized a right to parole barring evidence that a prisoner remains dangerous. It was argues that life prisoners have no right to a term less than life (and) so denial of parole “merely means that the inmate will have to serve out his sentence as expected.”

Last year two decisions by the CA Supreme court reiterated the need to show “some evidence” that the prisoner poses a risk and in one case, the state high court held that the heinousness (of the 1971 crime) was not enough to justify continued incarceration. [What? Does this mean that a jury and a court’s decision can be overturned at another time by another court without regard to the people’s decision? Or a retrial based on new evidence? ed.]. The same court, on the same day, also referred to the “some evidence” standard but (also) ruled that gov. Schwarzenegger had identified grounds for denying parole when he said that (that prisoner) suffered a “lack of insight” into how he came to… kill his wife.


Now we come to a court of appeals that has been appointed by differing political Presidents and the determination, apparently, now is one which will be influenced by politics and different agendas rather than on a purely objective bench of judges. How much political beliefs will have an influence remains to be seen, but the public – society at large – is in danger of losing comfort at the expense of murderers and hardened criminals further educated in the closed environment of jails and prisons. On the other hand the court could establish the governor’s exclusive control over parole which, again, enters the realm of politics.


“They scared me to death,” said a paralegal regarding questions from the bench following oral arguments in the case last year, “It seemed clear to me that the judges are wanting to reverse this decision.” This is the statement by a man who spent 33 years in prison, studied law (at taxpayers expense) and secured his own court-ordered release in 2003, marking a turning point in the battle between state officials and courts over parole.


Legal scholars now say that this case now going before the full 11-judge court may provide a decision which will depend on how federal judges interpret the intent of laws on sentencing. And, “It goes back to the question of whether we want sentences to be punitive and how to weigh rehabilitation verses punishment”



We are now left to consider: what do we understand, what do we learn from Torah study and what do we (as a society) want from our courts, our judges and our over-all “Judeo-Christian” based ethical legal system. How do we, individually, consider the ramifications of the criminal mind seeking freedom and society’s need for peace of mind?


Not too long ago, it was considered that an inmate (a prisoner – one incarcerated for having murdered) had foregone his ‘rights’ and his ‘privileges’ as a member of society and as such did not enjoy the freedoms that legally observant citizens did. When did this concept change? Should those convicted and sentenced to life in prison for murder – no matter the “rehabilitation” or not – expect to find his rights and privileges restored by parole boards and judges who are influenced by au courant concepts of ‘liberty for all’, which would, following that line of thought, include non-citizens who would fly planes into buildings or murder another person in any manner? Should we consider inmates in prisons as living in a "city of sanctuary"? If so, would it follow that if they were ‘freed’ by parole boards and judges, that they would be placing themselves in a position whereby their victim’s relatives could then murder them in retaliation without fear of retribution according to the law?


If the economy made a 180° turn and we no longer had to reduce prison staff, would all of these questions be moot? What is our obligation to our fellow who finds himself incarcerated for acts for which he truly regrets?

___Yisrael Betzalel ben Avraham

I have used the masculine form here, even though we find many women in prisons because they too have murdered, simply because it is easier than to continue to say: “him or her”; “he or she”, or the strange construction- “s/he”.

* Los Angeles Times – California Section, pp A41 & A51; Sunday 13 December 2009 with editorial license taken in paraphrasing the article by Carol J. Williams as well as inserting my own questions, note and comment. Please consider this situation with the concern that it requires. Thank you.

He Who Breaks Enemies…

Before we finish looking at the Shemonah Esrei, and I leave you to learn from the book on your own, we need to look at the prayer which deals with the ‘slanderers’. There is an important and interesting bit of history involved in this prayer. It is one that we should all know about.

…hvqt yht la ,ynyslmlv

And for the slanderers let there be no hope, and may all evil be instantly destroyed. And all of Your enemies should be quickly cut off, and the rebellious sinners You should quickly uproot, and smash, and break, and humble quickly in our day. Blessed are You, HaShem, who breaks enemies and humbles rebellious sinners.

What are we to make of this prayer? To begin with, we have simply “turned the other cheek” – for whatever reason, this is not something that we believe in, in any wholesale manner. We did this far too many times in our history and perhaps we finally earned our lesson 70 years ago in 1939. Never again! But back to the question: we ask G-d to break our enemies and to humble the sinners. Note the difference. We, as Jews, are sensitive to the difference between the person and the evil that they commit. We pray for evil to be destroyed.

Now this prayer was directed toward our fellow Jews! And we believe that he may have been caught up in the negative aspects of life that were, at that time, all around him (or her). But we will look at the historical aspect in a moment. Remember for now that when we pray we are asking for HaShem to remove the conceit or arrogance from the person so that these aspects of the Yetzer Hara will not have the influence to propel him into doing evil.

Now the background of this prayer is that it was not one of the 18 (the original 18 prayers that were instituted by the Great Assembly c3441 or about 315 BCE); however its historical basis eventually made it worthy of inclusion. And why is that? Well we find that in the Talmud there are discussions about this prayer and there is an allusion to the significance to the number 18 [which we find in Psalm 29] where it says that G-d’s name is mentioned eighteen times in reference to the Creation. So the eighteen prayers are a parallel to the number of times that we mention HaShem. So when we pray the Shemoneh Esrai we are recognizing G-d as Creator and Sustainer of everything.

Of course there is another opinion. That one says that the 18 prayers are a parallel to the eighteen times that the name of G-d is mentioned in the Sh’ma.

Then the Talmud teaches that there are really nineteen blessings in the Shemoneh Esrai. For in Psalm 29 there is a nineteenth mention of G-d (even though that is a mention of another Name!). The 19^th mention alludes to His attribute of justice and so the extra prayer [wherein we ask G-d to execute justice on His enemies and rebellious sinners].

As to the ‘other’ opinion regarding the Sh’ma: the first verse, you know reads- “Hear Israel, the L-rd is our G-d, the L-rd is One.” The word “One” is another (veiled?) reference to HaShem thereby making nineteen mentions of HaShem in the Sh’ma also.

The 19^th mention relates to those who oppose the Jewish people, those whom we ask G-d to destroy in this additional prayer. The Talmud further refers to this 19^th prayer as “the blessing of the Sadducees”. It is also refers to the heretics.

The Sadducees were those people who maintained that the Written Torah was given at Mt. Sinai but they maintained that the Oral Torah was not divinely given. It was not enough that they held this belief but they attempted to enforce their belief on everyone else and went to the foreign occupying government power and informed on Jews (who continued to believe in the divinity of the Oral Torah). The result being the murder and death of so many Jews! Jews informing on Jews. Jew vs. Jew. Will it ever end?

This prayer was instituted during the time of Rabbi Gamliel II in the city of Yavneh sometime after the destruction of the Second Temple. The rabbi believed that the Sadducees’s informing on believing Jews was an intolerable situation and that it was necessary to pray to G-d to take the heretics from their midst. As it turned out, it was Shmuel HaKatan (so called because of his extreme modesty) who created the structure of the nineteenth prayer.

Now the Sadducees eventually died out (which is another story in itself that we won’t go into here) and the prayer seemed to not be required anymore. However we find that the threat that they posed continues to take different forms even today. It has come from Jews who converted to Catholicism [those who were “forced” to Catholicism often continued to be “Hidden Jews” for the rest of their lives!]. At another time if come for the “Enlightened” Jews (for which you can provide different names, if you wish), as well as from the so called: Messianic Jews and Jews for Jesus and the like. And, as we have seen, in more direct forms in Germany and now is Iran. We continue to see threat from both within and without the Jewish people and we can not allow this nineteenth blessing to become obsolete. No not. Not until the Messiah comes.

Is there any wonder that we hear: “We want Moshiach Now!” For truly, Moshiach Matters.

B’Shalom,

What are we learning?

...from our week-day morning prayers:

"With abounding love You have loved us, Oh L*rd our G_d, with exceeding compassion You have shown us Your mercy. Oh our Father, our King, for the sake of our fathers who trusted in You and whom You did teach the statues of life, be gracious to us also and teach us. Oh our Father - our merciful Father - have mercy on us and prepare our hearts to understand, to discern, to hearken and to learn to teach and observe, to practice and to fulfill, in love, all the words of instruction contained in Your Law. Enlighten us through Your Torah and cause us to cleave to Your commandments, Your mitzvot, and unite our hearts to love and revere Your name so that we may never suffer humiliation..."

What are we learning?
What shall we learn?
And when shall we learn, understand, discern... and teach?
If not now; when?

Hiatus

This week, having taken last weeks injunction of Lech Lecha - GO... I have done so: gone to procure my appointment for (the 2nd) eye surgery. Therefore, I will be unable to facilitate our Shabbos Torah Study Group discussion and learning this week.

See you all next week, that being that HaShem wills it. Selah.


The picture above is Avraham and Sarah in their tent, offering hospitality. Sarah stayed in the tent, and Avraham rushed out to greet guests. According to the Midrash, when Sarah was alive (and then later again when Rivka moved into the tent) her Shabbat candles burned all week long, her challah didn't go stale all week, and G-d's presence hung over her tent in the form of a cloud.